Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

2008

United States Supreme Court

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Kewanee Revisited: Returning To First Principles Of Intellectual Property Law To Determine The Issue Of Federal Preemption, Sharon K. Sandeen Jul 2008

Kewanee Revisited: Returning To First Principles Of Intellectual Property Law To Determine The Issue Of Federal Preemption, Sharon K. Sandeen

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

In the early 1970s it was thought that states could regulate in the areas of trade secrets without interfering with federal patent policies. However, this concept was called into question in the Sixth Circuit's ruling in Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron. In 1974 the Supreme Court ruled that Ohio's trade secret law was not preempted by federal patent law. This article revisits the issues raised in Kewanee in light of the Supreme Court's current preemption jurisprudence, changes in patent law, copyright law, and trade secret law since that time. First, the article reviews the history and context of the Kewanee …


Meddimmune, Microsoft, And Ksr: The United States Supreme Court In 2007 Tips The Balance In Favor Of Innovation In Patent Cases, And Thrice Reverses The Federal Circuit, Sue Ann Mota Jan 2008

Meddimmune, Microsoft, And Ksr: The United States Supreme Court In 2007 Tips The Balance In Favor Of Innovation In Patent Cases, And Thrice Reverses The Federal Circuit, Sue Ann Mota

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

In 2007 the Supreme Court reversed three patent cases from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The three cases were MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. (holding a patent licensee does not have to breach a license agreement before seeking declaratory judgment that the underlying patent is invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed), Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp. (holding Microsoft did not supply a component of an invention from the United States that had the possibility of infringing under the Patent Act), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (holding the requirement of non-obviousness under the Patent Act is analyzed …