Law Commons^™

Access To Justice For Black Inventors, Jordana R. Goodman Assistant Professor Of Law, Khamal Patterson

Vanderbilt Law Review

To receive a patent, an inventor must meet certain inventive and procedural standards. Their invention must be novel, nonobvious, and written in such a way that any person skilled in the inventive subject can make and use the invention without undue experimentation. This process is far from objective.

An inventor is not always communicating within their own social circle. An inventor is required to communicate their invention so that a patent examiner believes a person having ordinary skill in the art ("PHOSITA") would recognize the invention as nonobvious. Moreover, a fictitious skilled person must be able to make and use …

Taylor V. Hunton Andrews Kurth, Llp: Patents - Legal Malpractice, Nate Kelly

Transactions: The Tennessee Journal of Business Law

No abstract provided.

The Social Value Of Intellectual Property, Alina Ng Boyte

IP Theory

No abstract provided.

When Patent Litigators Become Neurosurgeons, Katie Chang

Washington Law Review Online

Patent law is where the law meets the most cutting-edge and innovative technology of its time. Usually, subject matter experts, with the help of lawyers, are the ones applying for patents. But when it comes to granting and enforcing patent rights, the job falls onto lawyers and judges, who, for the most part, are likely not experts in the relevant technical field. Bridging the gap between technological expertise and legal expertise has been a pain point in patent litigation, one that Congress has tried to rectify for many years. This Comment primarily examines one of Congress’s solutions—the Patent Pilot Program—and …

Don’T Cite Funk, Oskar Liivak

Catholic University Law Review

For patent eligibility the Supreme Court continues to rely on its 1947 opinion in Funk Brothers Seed v. Kalo Inoculant. It is one of the most cited cases for patent eligibility and the Supreme Court relies heavily upon it. It forms one of the foundations of the current eligibility test in Mayo v. Prometheus. This article argues that this reliance is in error. Funk is just not appropriate for modern patent eligibility. Interestingly this view is not new. Ever since its appearance in Flook, the Supreme Court’s use of Funk has been dogged by criticism that faults the Court for …

The Power Of Local: Nearby Innovators Dominate Patented Technology Development, Richard Gruner

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

Advances by nearby innovators – close enough to interact in person – play key roles in patented technology development. Patents frequently cite nearby innovations, identifying these local innovations as the background for further patented inventions. Such citations reveal narrow geographic areas with intensely active innovation communities advancing similar projects and technologies. Local innovators – working within a commutable distance of 40 miles or less of each other – accounted for 25 percent of all patent citations between 2010 and 2019 and about 21 percent of citations by disinterested patent examiners reviewing patent applications. These percentages of citations to local advances …

The Ai Quid Pro Quo Problem: Suggesting A Framework For Patents Involving Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Or -Created Inventions, Daniel Wicklund

William & Mary Business Law Review

Innovation involving artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly expanding and diffusing into other areas of technology. Additionally, inventors have been using AI to assist in new technology for quite a while and have likely received patents from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or “Office”) for their inventions without disclosing the AI involved in the patentable subject matter. As AI has become increasingly present in the implementation of new technology, the question of whether an AI can be an inventor has arisen. In Thaler v. Iancu and on appeal, the courts have affirmatively said no. However, this decision implicates …

A Compulsory Solution To The Machine Problem: Recognizing Artificial Intelligence As Inventors In Patent Law, Cole G. Merritt

Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is already disrupting and will likely continue to disrupt many industries. Despite the role AI already plays, AI systems are becoming increasingly powerful. Ultimately, these systems may become a powerful tool that can lead to the discovery of important inventions or significantly reduce the time required to discover these inventions. Even now, AI systems are independently inventing. However, the resulting AI-generated inventions are unable to receive patent protection under current US patent law. This unpatentability may lead to inefficient results and ineffectively serves the goals of patent law.

To embrace the development and power of AI, Congress …

Rethinking Patent Law's Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction, Christa Laser

Cleveland State Law Review

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was created in 1982 to unify and clarify patent law, inter alia. It was built from political compromise after the Hruska Commission, which studied the caseload crisis in the federal appellate courts in the 1970s, initially recommended creation of a new National Court of Appeals that would exist between the regional federal appellate circuits and the Supreme Court. The Federal Circuit judges admirably implemented these functions for four decades.

However, the initial function of the Federal Circuit might no longer be as needed in the current judicial climate. The environment …

Rethinking Equitable Estoppel In Patent Law, Joshua J. Lustig

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

In almost every context, the Federal Circuit has used estoppel doctrines to provide protection to parties from some sort of injustice. Yet recently, with equitable estoppel, the Federal Circuit has decided to infuse concepts of Article III justiciability to justify limiting the doctrine as only applicable to issued patents. In doing so, the Federal Circuit has ignored the long history behind equitable estoppel in favor of a rule that is improperly rationalized by the Constitution. This note argues that Federal Circuit's recent equitable estoppel jurisprudence is inconsistent with equity's goal of fairness and presents a new theory of equitable estoppel …

Fair Use As A Market Facilitator, Miriam Marcowitz-Bitton, Dan Bombach

Akron Law Review

The Digital Age has enabled individuals worldwide to store, organize, and share everything from cherished memories embodied in photographs and videos to academic writing and correspondence. Yet, archived collections of academic, public, and private libraries are out of reach to many, and many books are now beyond reach because they are no longer in print. The high cost of digitization exacerbates these challenges.

In 2004, Google Inc. responded to these issues by announcing a project to scan and digitize the collections of several leading universities and public libraries (the “Google Books” project). The project offered users the opportunity to search …

Authoring Prior Art, Joseph P. Fishman, Kristelia Garcia

Vanderbilt Law Review

Patent law and copyright law are widely understood to diverge in how they approach prior art, the universe of information that already existed before a particular innovation's development. For patents, prior art is paramount. An invention can't be patented unless it is both novel and nonobvious when viewed against the backdrop of all the earlier inventions that paved the way. But for copyrights, prior art is supposed to be virtually irrelevant. Black-letter copyright doctrine doesn't care if a creative work happens to resemble its predecessors, only that it isn't actually copied from them. In principle, then, outside of the narrow …

Resorbing Patent Law's Kessler Cat Into The General Law Of Preclusion, Dennis Crouch, Homayoon Rafatijo

Akron Law Review

The Supreme Court has warned against the creation and expansion of patent-specific rules of procedure where the general law would suffice. The recently revived and expanded Kessler doctrine is one such patent-specific rule, and we argue its time has come for resorption into the general law of preclusion that has since expanded to encompass the doctrine. We utilize a novel law and economic analysis of the rules of preclusion to demonstrate how lower courts’ expansion of the Kessler doctrine defeats the rationale behind the general law of preclusion.

The Way Lawyers Worked, Michael Risch, Mike Viney

University of Cincinnati Law Review

Court and litigation operations are opaque in the best of times, and the lack of explanatory Nineteenth Century legal records makes it even more difficult to learn how lawyers and judges went about their business. This may be one of the reasons there are so few accounts detailing the nuts and bolts of 1800s law practice. This Article illuminates the development of litigation and the law in the middle of the Nineteenth Century by examining archival court and Patent Office records.

Most accounts of the time focus either on judicial opinions or the relationship of the parties, but few articles …

A Machete For The Patent Thicket: Using Noerr-Pennington Doctrine’S Sham Exception To Challenge Abusive Patent Tactics By Pharmaceutical Companies, Lisa Orucevic

Vanderbilt Law Review

Outrageous drug prices have dominated news coverage of the American healthcare system for years. Yet despite widespread condemnation of skyrocketing drug prices, nothing seems to change. Pharmaceutical companies can raise drug prices with impunity because they hold patents on their drugs, which give them monopolies. These monopolies are only supposed to last twenty years, and then competing lower-cost drugs like generics can enter the market, driving down the costs of pharmaceuticals for all. But pharmaceutical companies have created “patent thickets,” dense webs of overlapping patents surrounding one drug, which have artificially extended the companies’ monopolies for years or even decades …

Trick Or Treat? How A U.S. Patent Over A Method For Processing Sugarcane Wrongly Alarmed The Colombian Panela Industry, Carter Ostrowski

University of Cincinnati Law Review

No abstract provided.

Breaking The Status Quo Of International Design Law: How The United States' Design Law Frustrates The Purpose Of The Hague Agreement, Nicholas P. Mack (J.D. Candidate)

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

This Note explores how the United States' substantive law frustrates the purpose of an international procedural agreement. The Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs revolutionized the process of applying for industrial design protections on a global scale. The Hague Agreement's purpose is to support easily and efficiently acquired industrial design protections in contracting parties to the agreement by simplifying procedures for obtaining protection. The United States-a country without a coherent and dedicated industrial design law-joined this agreement with effect in 2015, allowing designers around the world to easily apply for industrial design protections in the United States. …

A Typology Of Disclosure, Sharon K. Sandeen

Akron Law Review

Information and data have always been valuable to businesses, but in the Information Age, as businesses have figured out more ways to commoditize the information and data they possess, there has been a corresponding increase in expressed concerns about the unauthorized “disclosure” of information. Often, these concerns are expressed in absolute terms, as if any unauthorized disclosure of information constitutes an act of unfair competition or theft. The problem is that the common understanding of disclosure, particularly among information owners that seek to restrict access to the information they possess, belies the legal meaning of the term as used in …

After The Trolls: Patent Litigation As Ex Post Market-Making, Robert Merges

Akron Law Review

Patent policy has been dominated lately by efforts to reduce rent-seeking patent troll litigation. As recent reforms begin to take effect, it is timely to consider the more constructive aspects of patent litigation. This Article contends that the lag between product development and patent litigation, which pushes the problem of patent valuation into the ex post (after product development) period, serves just such a positive function. Re-search, development, and product roll-out can all take place first. Then, at a later stage, patent litigation sorts out the relative merits and contributions of the various inventors and competitors who contributed to the …

Protecting Patent Owners From Infringement By The States: Will The Intellectual Property Rights Restoration Act Of 1999 Finally Satisfy The Court?, Brandon White

Akron Law Review

The Intellectual Property Rights Restoration Act of 1999 (IPRRA), a Senate Bill currently making its way through Congress, seeks to provide a remedy for patent infringement by the states that Supreme Court will find constitutional. In this Comment, Part II will explore the history of state sovereign immunity under both the Eleventh Amendment and the common law. Part III examines Senate Bill 1835, also known as the Intellectual Property Rights Restoration Act of 1999. Part III looks at not only the substantive provisions of the IPRRA, but also at the legal arguments and policy concerns that support the Act. Part …

Misappropriation And Patenting Of Traditional Ethnobotanical Knowledge And Genetic Resources, Maxim V. Gubarev

Journal of Food Law & Policy

Four-fifths of all pharmaceuticals have been developed from natural plant resources, and native plant resources similarly play a significant role in the development of new and improved crops.

Enabling Science Fiction, Camilla A. Hrdy, Daniel H. Brean

Michigan Technology Law Review

Patent law promotes innovation by giving inventors 20-year-long exclusive rights to their inventions. To be patented, however, an invention must be “enabled,” meaning the inventor must describe it in enough detail to teach others how to make and use the invention at the time the patent is filed. When inventions are not enabled, like a perpetual motion machine or a time travel device, they are derided as “mere science fiction”—products of the human mind, or the daydreams of armchair scientists, that are not suitable for the patent system.

This Article argues that, in fact, the literary genre of science fiction …

Can There Be Too Much Specialization? Specialization In Specialized Courts, Melissa F. Wasserman, Jonathan D. Slack

Northwestern University Law Review

While modern society has embraced specialization, the federal judiciary continues to prize the generalist jurist. This disconnect is at the core of the growing debate on the optimal level of specialization in the judiciary. To date, this discussion has largely revolved around the creation of specialized courts. Opinion specialization, however, provides an alternative, underappreciated method to infuse specialization into the judiciary. In contrast to specialized courts, opinion specialization is understudied and undertheorized.

This Article makes two contributions to the literature. First, this Article theorizes whether opinion specialization is a desirable practice. It argues that the practice’s costs and benefits are …

The Library Of Babel For Prior Art: Using Artificial Intelligence To Mass Produce Prior Art In Patent Law, Lucas R. Yordy

Vanderbilt Law Review

Artificial intelligence is playing an increasingly important role in the invention and innovation processes of our society. To date, though, much of the academic discussion on the interaction of artificial intelligence and the patent system focuses on the patentability of inventions produced by artificial intelligence. Little attention has been paid to organizations that are seeking to use artificial intelligence to defeat the patentability of otherwise patent-worthy inventions by mass producing prior art. This Note seeks to highlight the consequences of allowing mass-produced, AI-generated prior art to render valuable inventions unpatentable. Specifically, this Note concludes that AI-generated prior art decreases the …

Statutory And Constitutional Problems With Judicially-Imposed Patent-Claim Limitations, Sloane Kyrazis

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

The safety valve standard articulated in In re Katz Interactive Call Processing Litigation is at odds with the provisions of the U.S. Patent Act and violates constitutional due process. Without requisite constitutional protections and those protections guaranteed by the U.S. Patent Act, patentees in complex modern patent litigation are at risk of having their patent rights deprived from contrary to the congressional intent articulated in the statute and without requisite process. The courts must balance their need for efficient administration of the law in patent cases by implementing equitable measures to ensure that patentees’ rights are not trampled on. Additionally, …

Evidence-Based Patent Damages, Taorui Guan

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Association For Molecular Pathology V. Myriad Genetics: A Critical Reassessment, Jorge L. Contreras

Michigan Technology Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics is an essential piece of the Court’s recent quartet of patent eligibility decisions, which also includes Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo v. Prometheus, and Alice v. CLS Bank. Each of these decisions has significantly shaped the contours of patent eligibility under Section 101 of the Patent Act in ways that have been both applauded and criticized. The Myriad case, however, was significant beyond its impact on Section 101 jurisprudence. It was seen, and litigated, as a case impacting patient rights, access to healthcare, scientific freedom, …

Equitable Defenses In Patent Law, Christa J. Laser

University of Miami Law Review

In patent law, “unenforceability” can have immense consequences. At least five equitable doctrines make up the defense of “unenforceability” as it was codified into the Patent Act in 1952: laches; estoppel; unclean hands; patent misuse; and according to some, inequitable conduct. Yet in the seventy years since incorporation of equitable defenses into the patent statute, the Supreme Court has not clarified their reach. Indeed, twice in the last four years, the Supreme Court avoided giving complete guidance on the crucial questions of whether, and when, such equitable defenses are available to bar damages in cases brought at law.

Several interpretive …

Unregistered Patents, Miriam Marcowitz-Bitton, Emily Michiko Morris

Washington Law Review

Although all should be treated equally under the law, patent law has long been known to favor some less than others. Patentable technology is highly heterogeneous, covering everything from minute improvements in electronics to pioneering new artificial organs, but patent protection itself is purely a one-size-fits-all system. Patents thus overreward some while underrewarding others. On the one hand, patents overreward low-investment, low-value inventions by granting them the same twenty-year term of protection as those that required much higher investments and yield much higher social value. The resulting glut of low-quality patents has contributed greatly to the “patent crisis” of opportunistic …

Don't Go Breakin' My (3d Bioprinted) Heart: Dissecting Patentability And Regulation Of 3d Bioprinted Organs, Anna Marie Whitacre

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

In light of the growing realism of 3D bioprinted organs, legal issues arising from these concerns can easily bleed into our society. This bleeding demands exploration. Should 3D bioprinted organs be regulated as natural organs or as medical devices? Are 3D bioprinted organs patentable? What happens if a 3D bioprinted organ is subject to a successful patent infringement suit? Does the recipient face a Repo Men fate?

The beginning of this note dissects the scientific underpinnings of 3D bioprinted organs. Part II explores statutory authority and controlling, or otherwise persuasive, case law that pertains to subject-matter patentability. Current rights associated …