Law Commons^™

23andme Inc.: Patent Law And Lifestyle Genetics, Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

The venture, 23andMe Inc., raises a host of issues in respect of patent law, policy, and practice in respect of lifestyle genetics and personalised medicine. The company observes: ‘We recognize that the availability of personal genetic information raises important issues at the nexus of ethics, law, and public policy’. 23andMe Inc. has tested the boundaries of patent law, with its patent applications, which cut across information technology, medicine, and biotechnology. The company’s research raises fundamental issues about patentability, especially in light of the litigation in Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories Inc. and Association for Molecular Pathology …

The Rise Of Contingent Fee Representation In Patent Litigation, David Schwartz

David L. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

Patents For Humanity, Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

This article evaluates two policy initiatives by the United States Government to address access to essential medicines—Priority Review vouchers and “Patents for Humanity”. Such proposals are aimed at speeding up the regulatory review of inventions with humanitarian uses and applications by the United States Food and Drug Administration, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office. It is argued that such measures fall short of international standards and norms established by the World Intellectual Property Organization Development Agenda 2007; the World Trade Organization’s Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision of …

An Overview Of Patent Prosecution, Frederick W. Dingledy

Library Staff Publications

No abstract provided.

Rules Versus Standards: Competing Notions Of Inconsistency Robustness In Patent Law, David S. Olson, Stefania Fusco

David S. Olson

This Article applies a new paradigm from the field of computer science—inconsistency robustness (IR)—in order to analyze the competing ways in which the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit craft patent law standards and rules. The IR paradigm is a shift from the previous paradigm of inconsistency elimination. The new IR paradigm recognizes that modern, complex information systems must perform notwithstanding persistent and continuous inconsistencies. The focus on IR encourages system designers to recognize the reality of persistent inconsistency when building robust systems that can perform reliably. Legal systems regularly process a great deal of complexity and inconsistency, and thus, by …

What Is The "Invention"?, Christopher A. Cotropia

William & Mary Law Review

Patent law is in flux, with recent disputes and changes in doctrine fueled by increased attention from the Supreme Court and en banc activity by the Federal Circuit. The natural reaction is to analyze each doctrinal area involved on its own. Upon a closer look, however, many patent cases concern a single, fundamental dispute. Conflicts in opinions on such issues as claim interpretation methodology and the written description requirement are really disagreements over which “invention” the courts should be considering.

There are two concepts of invention currently in play in patent decisions. The first is an “external invention” definition, in …

The Null Patent, Sean B. Seymore

William & Mary Law Review

Failure is the basis of much of scientific progress because it plays a key role in building knowledge. In fact, negative results compose the bulk of knowledge produced in scientific research. This is not a bad thing because failures always produce valuable technical information—whether it be a serendipitous finding, an abundance of unexpected technical data, or simply knowledge that an initial hypothesis was totally wrong. Though some have recognized that the dissemination of negative results has many upsides for science, transforming scientific norms toward disclosure is no easy task. As for patent law, the potentially important role that negative results …

Regulatory And Judicial Implementations Of Patent Law Flexibilities, Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Search For America's Most Eligible Patent: The Impact Of The Bilski Decision On Obtaining Patents For Processes And Business Methods, Mark Connolly

William & Mary Business Law Review

For one year, the business community, patent lawyers, and the media in the United States speculated as to how the Supreme Court would rule in Bilski v. Kappos. Some forecasted the end of all business method patents, while others advanced the idea that after the case, practically any business method could be patented. When the dust settled, the Court’s holding did neither: it determined that the machine-or-transformation test is not the exclusive test for patent eligibility under Section 101, and left open the possibility for business method patents to withstand future challenges.

While this result frustrated many that advocated for …

Patent Contingent Fee Litigation, David Schwartz

David L. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

A Submission To The Joint Standing Committee On Treaties On The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (#Acta), Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer“While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell“ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas“Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International.“I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European ParliamentExecutive SummaryAs an independent scholar …

Will Gene Patents Derail The Next-Generation Of Genetic Technologies?: A Reassessment Of The Evidence Suggests Not, Christopher M. Holman

UMKC Law Review

Judge Bryson recently asserted in Association for Molecular Pathology v. US Patent and Trademark Office (dissenting-in-part) that human gene patents "present a significant obstacle to the next generation of innovation in genetic medicine — multiplex tests and whole-genome sequencing." His concern over the impact of gene patents on genetic testing, which coincides with his position that certain gene patents should be declared patent ineligible, reflects a widely held misperception that 20% of human genes are patented in a manner that would necessarily result in infringement by whole genome sequencing and other forms of genetic testing. In fact, the myth that …

Not So Obvious After All: Patent Law's Nonobviousness Requirement, Ksr, And The Fear Of Hindsight Bias, Glynn S. Lunney Jr., Christian T. Johnson

Georgia Law Review

Before the creation of the Federal Circuit in 1982,
nonobviousness served as the primary gatekeeper for
patents. When patent holders sued for infringement and
lost, more than sixty percent of the time, they lost on the
grounds that their patent was obvious. With the advent of
the Federal Circuit, nonobviousness became a much less
difficult hurdle to surmount. From 1982 until 2005, when
patent holders sued for infringement and lost, obviousness
was the reason in less than fifteen percent of the cases.
While obviousness remained formally a requirement of
patent protection, there can be little doubt that the Federal
Circuit …

Patent Attorney Malpractice: Case-Within-A-Case-Within-A-Case, Samuel Oddi

Akron Law Faculty Publications

As literary devices, a “story-within-a story” and a “play-within-a-play” have a long lineage. Shakespeare seems to have been particularly fond of these devices. The legal analog may be seen as the “case-within-a-case” (“trial-within-a-trial,” “suit-within-a-suit”) arising in legal malpractice cases. The case-within-a-case terminology seems to be the most commonly used and hence will be used herein. While it is clear that the “case” is the malpractice case, it is not so clear what the “case-within-” is, which is usually referred to as the “underlying case.” Often, it seems to be presumed that the underlying case is limited to litigation, which would …

Patent Attorney Malpractice: Case-Within-A-Case-Within-A-Case, Samuel Oddi

Samuel Oddi

As literary devices, a “story-within-a story” and a “play-within-a-play” have a long lineage. Shakespeare seems to have been particularly fond of these devices. The legal analog may be seen as the “case-within-a-case” (“trial-within-a-trial,” “suit-within-a-suit”) arising in legal malpractice cases. The case-within-a-case terminology seems to be the most commonly used and hence will be used herein. While it is clear that the “case” is the malpractice case, it is not so clear what the “case-within-” is, which is usually referred to as the “underlying case.” Often, it seems to be presumed that the underlying case is limited to litigation, which would …

Paving The Path To Accurately Predicting Legal Outcomes: A Comment On Professor Chien's Predicting Patent Litigation (With J. Kesan & T. Sichelman), David Schwartz

David L. Schwartz

No abstract provided.

Analyzing The Role Of Npes In The Patent System (With J. Kesan), David Schwartz

David L. Schwartz

Currently, there is an important debate about the role of non-practicing entities in patent litigation. People are asking: what are the costs and benefits associated with NPE litigation? Are they too high, too low, or just right? This paper makes two contributions to the discussion. First, we review a recent study, "The Direct Costs of NPE Disputes," by James Bessen and Michael J. Meurer. The study presents new data on the litigation costs and settlement expenses incurred by a subset of defendants in NPE cases. Some of their findings are provocative, but we find their methodology to be deficient in …

America's First Patents, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Courts and commentators vigorously debate early American patent history because of a spotty documentary record. To fill these gaps, scholars have examined the adoption of the Intellectual Property Clause of the Constitution, correspondence, dictionaries, and British and colonial case law. But there is one largely ignored body of information — the content of early patents themselves. While many debate what the founders thought, no one asks what early inventors thought — and those thoughts are telling. This Article is the first comprehensive examination of how early inventors and their patents should inform our current thoughts about the patent system. To …

Patent Troll Myths, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

It turns out that just about everything we thought about patent trolls – good or bad – is wrong. Using newly gathered data, this article presents an ethnography of sorts about highly litigious non-practicing entity (NPE) plaintiffs. The results are surprising: they show that the conventional wisdom about patent trolls is likely based on anecdotal, but infrequently occurring, events. Instead, the patents enforced by so-called trolls – and the companies that obtained them – look a lot like other litigated patents and their owners. To be sure, whether an NPE qualifies as a troll depends on who is doing the …