Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
The "Printed Publication" Bar After Klopfenstein: Has The Federal Circuit Changed The Way Professors Should Talk About Science?, Sean B. Seymore
The "Printed Publication" Bar After Klopfenstein: Has The Federal Circuit Changed The Way Professors Should Talk About Science?, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
Would-be infringers target university patents because faculty inventors are more likely to make inadvertent disclosures than industrial inventors, possibly because of the importance of quick disclosure and publishing in academic science. In Klopfenstein, the Federal Circuit held that the posting of lecture slides after a talk triggered the printed publication bar of the patent statute. First, I argue (contrary to other commentators) that the Federal Circuit is consistent with prior precedent; that the public accessibility and dissemination inquiries should rest on substance rather than form. The focus of the § 102(b) inquiry remains on the inventor, who should lose the …
My Patent, Your Patent, Or Our Patent? Inventorship Disputes Within Academic Research Groups, Sean B. Seymore
My Patent, Your Patent, Or Our Patent? Inventorship Disputes Within Academic Research Groups, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
The statutory requirement of identifying the first and true inventor is often muddled by the mores and practices of academic science. Unfortunately, and despite claims of scientists and attorneys to the contrary, I contend that the inventive entity is not discovered but rather determined in and through social relationships. Although universities should always strive to promulgate policies which fully comport with the law, the biggest incentive for universities to insist on correct inventorship is financial. I argue that the rise in mentee claims for sole or joint inventorship, as well as the ever-present threat of an inequitable conduct defense in …