Law Commons^™

Trust: A Model For Disclosure In Patent Law, Ari Ezra Waldman

Indiana Law Journal

How to draw the line between public and private is a foundational, first-principles question of privacy law, but the answer has implications for intellectual property, as well. This project is one in a series of papers about first-person disclosures of information in the privacy and intellectual property law contexts, and it defines the boundary between public and nonpublic information through the lens of social science —namely, principles of trust.

Patent law’s public use bar confronts the question of whether legal protection should extend to information previously disclosed to a small group of people. I present evidence that shows that current …

Indefiniteness As An Invalidity Case, Janet M. Smith

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The India Patent System: A Decade In Review, Vindhya S. Mani, Divyanshu Srivastava, Mukundan Chakrapani, Jay Erstling

Cybaris®

No abstract provided.

Amending Patent Eligibility, David O. Taylor

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Supreme Court’s recent treatment of the law of patent eligibility has introduced an era of confusion, lack of administrability, and, ultimately, risk of under-investment in research and development. As a result, patent law — and in particular the law governing patent eligibility — is in a state of crisis. In this Article I show why, despite this crisis, it is highly unlikely that the Supreme Court will correct itself and solve these problems. I therefore proceed to consider how Congress might — consistent with its constitutional authority — correct these problems through appropriate legislation. I identify principles that should …

How Much Has The Supreme Court Changed Patent Law?, Paul Gugliuzza

Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided a remarkable number of patent cases in the past decade, particularly as compared to the first twenty years of the Federal Circuit’s existence. No longer is the Federal Circuit “the de facto Supreme Court of patents,” as Mark Janis wrote in 2001. Rather, it seems the Supreme Court is the Supreme Court of patents. In the article at the center of this symposium, Judge Timothy Dyk of the Federal Circuit writes that the Supreme Court’s decisions “have had a major impact on patent law,” citing, among other evidence, the Court’s seventy percent reversal rate …

I Dissent: The Federal Circuit's "Great Dissenter," Her Influence On The Patent Dialogue, And Why It Matters, Daryl Lim

Faculty Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.