Law Commons^™

Reining In A 'Renegade' Court: Tc Heartland And The Eastern District Of Texas, Jonas Anderson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, the Supreme Court tightened the venue requirement for patent cases, making it more difficult for a plaintiff to demonstrate that a district court has venue over a defendant. Many commentators, however, view TC Heartland as merely a “reshuffling” of the district courts that receive patent cases. Whereas before the case, a large percentage of patent cases were filed in the Eastern District of Texas, now, after TC Heartland, various other U.S. district courts (principally, the District of Delaware) have experienced an increase in patent infringement filings. Some commentators are unconvinced that this …

Moral Judgments In Trademark Law, Ned Snow

American University Law Review

Under the federal Lanham Act, eligibility for trademark protection depends on whether a mark is sufficiently moral. The Federal Circuit has recently held this provision of the Act to be unconstitutional based on its interpretation of speech doctrine. The context of trademark law, however, refutes this interpretation. Indeed, speech doctrine appears to support this morality requirement. Nevertheless, there seems to be another reason that the Federal Circuit held the morality requirement unconstitutional: the judicial discomfort with morality serving as a basis for law. This Essay concludes that this judicial discomfort is unjustified in this instance. From both a constitutional and …

Empirical Studies Of Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson

Working Papers

Patent claims define the scope of the patent right and hence are central to the operation of the patent system. Patent prosecutors devote substantial effort to crafting patent claims so as to maximize the scope of their right without “reading on” prior art (and thereby defeating novelty). Businesses seeking to enter a technology marketplace must be careful to avoid encroaching patent claims. Thus, when patentees enforce their rights, the interpretation of claim boundaries guides both validity and infringement analysis. Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Markman v. Westview Instruments (517 U.S. 370 (1996)), holding that “the construction of a patent, …

Patent Dialogue, Jonas Anderson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

This Article examines the unique dialogic relationship that exists between the Supreme Court and Congress concerning patent law. In most areas of the law, Congress and the Supreme Court engage directly with each other to craft legal rules. When it comes to patent law, however, Congress and the Court often interact via an intermediary institution: the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In patent law, dialogue often begins when Congress or the Supreme Court acts as a dialogic catalyst, signaling reform priorities to which the Federal Circuit often responds.

Appreciating the unique nature of patent dialogue has important …

Congress As A Catalyst Of Patent Reform At The Federal Circuit, Jonas Anderson

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is the dominant institution in patent law. The court’s control over patent law and policy has led to a host of academic proposals to shift power away from the court and towards other institutions, including the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and federal district courts. Surprisingly, however, academics have largely dismissed Congress as a potential institutional check on the Federal Circuit. Congress, it is felt, is too slow, too divided, and too beholden to special interests to effectively monitor changes in innovation and respond with appropriate reforms. …

Past, Present, And Future In The Life Of The U.S. Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit, Paul R. Michel

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

2007 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Dean L. Fanelli, Victor N. Balancia, Robert J. Smyth, Carl P. Bretscher, Arthur M. Antonelli, Mark J. Sullivan, Kent E. Basson

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Survey Of The Federal Circuit's Patent Law Decisions In 2006: A New Chapter In The Ongoing Dialogue With The Supreme Court, Gregory A. Castanias, Lawrence D. Rosenberg, Michael S. Fried, Todd R. Geremia

American University Law Review

In 2006, the Federal Circuit decided only one portion of one patent case en banc, and that was done mainly as a procedural matter (the entire case was not argued to an en banc court) in order to reconcile prior conflicting precedent on the issue of induced patent infringement with the recent Supreme Court decision in Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd., involving induced copyright infringement. But in light of the Supreme Court’s much more muscular review of the Federal Circuit’s patent cases—which may not even reflect the full extent of the Court’s interest in the Federal Circuit’s patent decisions—the …

The Federal Circuit And The Supreme Court, Arthur J. Gajarsa, Lawrence P. Cogswell

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

2005 Trademark Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Stephen R. Baird

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Future Role Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit Now That It Has Turned 21, Richard Linn

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

2001 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit , Jaseph Ferraro

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Review Of The 1999 Trademark Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit , Stephen R. Baird

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Review Of The 1999 Patent Law Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit , Phil N. Makrogiannis

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Echoes Of Scientific Truth In The Halls Of Justice: The Standards Of Review Applied By The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit In Patent-Related Matters , Lawrence M. Sung

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.