Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/19-1434_ancf.pdf
Page Number: 21

Cite as:  594 U. S. ____ (2021) 

17 

Opinion of the Court 

members of the respective Boards, whose decisions are ap-
pealable to the Federal Circuit.  See 41 U. S. C. §§7105(b), 
(d), (e), 7107(a).  Congress established both entities in 2006
and  gave  them  jurisdiction  over  disputes  involving  public 
contractors.  119 Stat. 3391–3394.  Whatever distinct issues 
that  scheme  might  present,  the  Boards  of  Contract  Ap-
peals—both young entrants to the regulatory landscape—
provide  the  PTAB  no  “foothold  in  history  or  tradition” 
across the Executive Branch.  Seila Law, 591 U. S., at ___ 
(slip op., at 21).

When it comes to the patent system in particular, adjudi-
cation has followed the traditional rule that a principal of-
ficer, if not the President himself, makes the final decision 
on how to exercise executive power.  Recall that officers in 
President  Washington’s  Cabinet  formed  the  first  Patent
Board in 1790.  1 Stat. 109–110.  The initial determination 
of  patentability  was  then  relegated  to  the  courts  in  1793, 
but  when  the  Executive  Branch  reassumed  authority  in
1836,  it  was  the  Commissioner  of  Patents—appointed  by
the President with the advice and consent of the Senate— 
who exercised control over the issuance of a patent.  5 Stat. 
117, 119.  The patent system, for nearly the next hundred 
years, remained accountable to the President through the
Commissioner,  who  directed  the  work  of  his  subordinates 
by, for example, hearing appeals from decisions by examin-
ers-in-chief,  the  forebears  of  today’s  APJs.    12  Stat.  246– 
247. 

The Government and Smith & Nephew find support for 
the structure of the PTAB in the predecessor Board of Ap-
peals established in 1927.  44 Stat. 1335–1336.  Simplified
somewhat, the Board of Appeals decided the patentability
of  inventions  in  panels  composed  of  examiners-in-chief 
without an appeal to the Commissioner.  But decisions by
examiners-in-chief could be reviewed by the Court of Cus-
toms and Patent Appeals (CCPA), an entity within the Ex-