Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Misuse Of Reasonable Royalty Damages As A Patent Infringement Deterrent, The, Brian J. Love
Misuse Of Reasonable Royalty Damages As A Patent Infringement Deterrent, The, Brian J. Love
Missouri Law Review
This Article studies the Federal Circuit's use of excessive reasonable royalty awards as a patent infringement deterrent. I argue against this practice, explaining that, properly viewed in context of the patent system as a whole, distorting the reasonable royalty measure of damages is an unnecessary and ineffective means of ensuring an optimal level of reward for inventors and deterrence for infringers. First, I introduce cases in which the Federal Circuit and other courts following its lead have awarded punitive reasonable royalty awards and explain the Federal Circuit's professed rationale for doing so. Next, I demonstrate that this practice makes little …
Increased Market Power As A New Secondary Consideration In Patent Law A Review Of Recent Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Andrew Blair-Stanek
Increased Market Power As A New Secondary Consideration In Patent Law A Review Of Recent Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Andrew Blair-Stanek
American University Law Review
Courts have developed several non-technical “secondary considerations” to help judges and juries in patent litigation decide whether a patent meets the crucial statutory requirement that a patent be non-obvious. This Article proposes a tenth secondary consideration to help judges and juries: increased market power. If a patent measurably increases its holders’ market power in the market into which it sells products or services, then that increase should weigh in favor of finding the patent non-obvious. Using increased market power incorporates the predictive benefits of several other secondary considerations, while often increasing the accuracy and availability of evidence. It would provide …
Is Novelty Obsolete - Chronicling The Irrelevance Of The Invention Date In U.S. Patent Law, Dennis D. Crouch
Is Novelty Obsolete - Chronicling The Irrelevance Of The Invention Date In U.S. Patent Law, Dennis D. Crouch
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
This paper presents a normative study of patent prosecution by examining the role that invention-date-based novelty rights play in U.S. patent law. Three sources inform the primary results: the prosecution history files of 21,000+ patent applications filed in the past decade; a survey of 1,000+ patent practitioners regarding their use of the novelty provisions of the Patent Act; and a collection of 11,000,000+ prior art references cited in recently-issued patents. Additional compilations of prosecution file histories for patents identified as either (1) valuable or (2) worthless supplement these data sets and allow for an evaluation of the differential importance of …
Why Fdca Section 505(U) Should Not Concern Us Greatly, Kyle Faget
Why Fdca Section 505(U) Should Not Concern Us Greatly, Kyle Faget
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
Among the many amendments found in the Food and Drug Administration Amendment Act of 2007 (FDAAA) is a provision at the end of the act, Section 505(u), which grants chiral switches five years of market exclusivity under certain circumstances. Prior to Congressional enactment of the FDAAA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) refused to award new chemical entity (NCE) status to enantiomers of previously approved racemic mixtures. The FDA defines a new chemical entity ("NCE") as a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by the FDA in any other application submitted under Section 505(b) of the …
Appellate Review Of Patent Claim Construction: Should The Federal Circuit Be Its Own Lexicographer In Matters Related To The Seventh Amendment, Eileen M. Herlihy
Appellate Review Of Patent Claim Construction: Should The Federal Circuit Be Its Own Lexicographer In Matters Related To The Seventh Amendment, Eileen M. Herlihy
Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review
The Federal Circuit stated in an en banc decision in Cybor Corp. v. FAS Technologies, Inc. that the construction of patent claims is "a purely legal issue," and is therefore subject to de novo review on appeal. The Cybor decision reaffirmed the position of the majority of the Federal Circuit which had been announced in its en banc Markman decision, and proclaimed that the de novo standard of review is supported by the Supreme Court's Markman decision, a Seventh Amendment opinion. However, Cybor included strong opposition to a de novo standard of review from some of the judges of the …
Biopiracy: The Struggle For Traditional Knowledge Rights, John Reid
Biopiracy: The Struggle For Traditional Knowledge Rights, John Reid
American Indian Law Review
No abstract provided.
2008 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Court A Review Of Recent Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit: Area Summaries, Todd Zubler, Nina Tallon, Jamie Wisz, Jamaica Szeliga
2008 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Court A Review Of Recent Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit: Area Summaries, Todd Zubler, Nina Tallon, Jamie Wisz, Jamaica Szeliga
American University Law Review
The United States Supreme Court took a slight breather from patent-law issues in 2008. After issuing three patent-law decisions in 2007 (including KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.), the Court issued just one patent-law decision in 2008—Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. Despite the Supreme Court’s slower pace, however, the Court’s influence loomed large in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2008. In a number of cases, the Federal Circuit continued to work through the implications of the Supreme Court’s recent precedents, most notably KSR and the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in eBay Inc. …
The Family Law Doctrine Of Equivalence, Amy L. Wax
The Family Law Doctrine Of Equivalence, Amy L. Wax
Michigan Law Review
Students of patent law learn the doctrine of equivalents. According to the doctrine, a patent protects an invention that does "the same work in substantially the same way, and accomplish[ es] substantially the same result," as the device described in the patent, even if it differs "'in name, form, or shape." In her new book, Nancy Polikoff has fashioned something like a parallel doctrine for families. Let's call it (with a slight play on words) the family law Doctrine of Equivalence. In today's world, according to Polikoff, a broad set of relationships now plays the same role as marriage and …