Law Commons^™

Creativity For The Common Good: The Case For Fair Use Of Prosthetics Patents, Roxanneh Mousavi

Seattle University Law Review

This Note examines how patent law inhibits accessibility to prosthetics, and how a fair use defense for patent infringement will make them more widely accessible. Part I will explain the basics of patent law, including its history, scope, and process of infringement. Part II will discuss the fair use defense against copyright and trademark infringement and explain why this defense should also be enforceable for patent infringement. Part III will provide an overview of 3D printing. Part IV will focus on 3D prosthetics, specifically on the story of two young prosthetic recipients, Griffin Matuszek and Evie Lambert. Finally, Part V …

"Prep"Aring For A Challenge To Government-Owned Patents, Caleb Holland

Catholic University Law Review

The United States Government owns one of the largest patent estates in the world, but it rarely brings suit for patent infringement. To understand why that may be, this paper looks critically at the Government as a patent holder. Specifically, the paper reviews the fundamentals of American patents and explores the intricacies unique to the Government as an entity that both grants and holds patent rights. The paper examines the historical progression of how the United States Government positions itself with regard to its patents, tracing this evolution from Constitutional origins to more recent statutory refinements. Finally, the paper looks …

Nonexcludable Surgical Method Patents, Jonas Anderson

William & Mary Law Review

A patent consists of only one right: the right to exclude others from practicing the patented invention. However, one class of patents statutorily lacks the right to exclude direct infringers: surgical method patents are not enforceable against medical practitioners or health care facilities, which are the only realistic potential direct infringers of such patents. Despite this, inventors regularly file for (and receive) surgical method patents. Why would anyone incur the expense (more than $20,000 on average) of acquiring a patent on a surgical method if that patent cannot be used to keep people from using the patent?

The traditional answer …

Pleading Patent Infringement: Res Ipsa Loquitur As A Guide, Andrew L. Milam

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Harnessing Human Potential: Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Patentability Under The Lens Of Myriad, Derek Van Den Abeelen

William & Mary Business Law Review

After the Supreme Court's decision in Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetic's, previously patentable materials may now be rejected as unpatentable subject matter, specifically because they cover natural products. This presents a problem for businesses performing adult stem cell research and development, because stem cells exist in nature but pluripotency in adult stem cells does not. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and federal courts must recognize that these stem cells are still patentable because there is human intervention that creates a product that could not exist in nature on its own. Neither the USPTO nor any …

Whodunnit? Divided Patent Infringement In Light Of Akamai Technologies, Inc. V. Limelight Networks, Inc., Mark Tomlinson

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

This Note provides background information on divided patent infringement in the United States with emphasis on landmark cases and the previous understanding of the Patent Act. Part II provides background information on the underlying controversies and the software at issue in each case. Part III discusses the opinions of the factions of the court, and Part IV dissects the reasoning of each. Part V examines the implications of Akamai on businesses and other method patent holders while acknowledging that the future of the court's holding remains uncertain.

Why Manufacturing Matters: 3d Printing, Computer-Aided Designs, And The Rise Of End-User Patent Infringement, Sklyer R. Peacock

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fixing Notice Failure: How To Tame The Trolls And Restore Balance To The Patent System, Mark Rawls

William & Mary Business Law Review

Patent litigation has become more frequent, more uncertain, and more expensive. Much of this can be traced to the rise of patent trolls asserting vague and uncertain software patents. Trolls have been derided as bringing frivolous and vexatious suits against productive companies, sapping the very same innovativeness that the patent system is supposed to encourage. Instead, companies are subject to nuisance-value suits as an ordinary course of business; for less established companies, such suits can threaten their very existence. Often, because of uncertain rules about claim construction and the granting of very broad patents, the accused infringer has no notice …

Asserting Patents To Combat Infringement Via 3d Printing: It’S No “Use”, Daniel Harris Brean

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

Three-dimensional ("3D") printing technology, which enables physical objects to be "printed" as easily as words can be printed on a page, is rapidly moving from industrial settings into consumers' homes. The advent of consumer grade 3D printers fundamentally alters the traditional allocation of manufacturing infrastructure and sales activity. No longer do manufacturers need to make, sell, and ship physical products in their physical states. Rather, consumers may download digital representations of products over the Internet for printing in the comfort their own homes. For products sold in this fashion that are patented, this presents difficult hurdles to enforcement against infringers. …

Lessons Learned From Fifteen Years In The Trenches Of Patent Litigation , Rick Mcdermott

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Marquette Law alum and partner with Alston+Bird, LLP, offers insights into patent litigation. In his speech, given March 5, 2010, McDermott examines how patent law developments such as Markman v. Westview Instruments, Cybor Corp. v. FAS Technologies, Inc., and In re Seagate have impacted the practice of patent infringement litigation.

Embedded Federal Questions, Exclusive Jurisdiction, And Patent-Based Malpractice Claims, Christopher G. Wilson

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

The New Invention Creation Activity Boundary In Patent Law, Margo A. Bagley

William & Mary Law Review

This Essay identifies a new boundary in patent law-illegal or immoral invention creation activity-and explores the possible challenges and opportunities it may facilitate. The boundary currently is neither robust nor extensive, and whether and under what circumstances it should exist at all is open to debate.

Rules And Standards On The Forefront Of Patentability, John F. Duffy

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Examination Priorities, Michael J. Meurer

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Harmonizing The Exclusionary Rights Of Patents With Compulsory Licensing, Troy L. Gwartney

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

What Goes Around, Comes Around: How Indian Tribes Can Profit In The Aftermath Of Seminole Tribe And Florida Prepaid, Jeremiah A. Bryar

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Of the approximate 1.5 million American Indians living in the United States only 403,714 were employed in 2001 and nearly one-third of them lived below the poverty line. This article explains that one possible solution to American Indian poverty is the creation of sovereign chartered research groups that would be shielded by tribal sovereign immunity. In patent law there are exceptions to a patent owner's ability to bring a successful suit against patent infringers. One of these exceptions is when a sovereign, such as an American Indian tribe, infringes on a patent owner's patent. Tribal sovereign immunity means that American …

A Realistic Approach To The Obviousness Of Inventions, Daralyn J. Durie, Mark A. Lemley

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patently Protectionist? An Empirical Analysis Of Patent Cases At The International Trade Commission, Colleen V. Chien

William & Mary Law Review

The International Trade Commission (ITC) provides a special forum for adjudicating patent disputes involving imports. It offers several advantages over United States district courts to patentees, including relaxed jurisdictional requirements, speed, and unique remedies. Unlike district courts, the ITC almost automatically grants injunctive relief to prevailing patentees, and does not recognize certain defenses to infringement. These features have been justified as needed to prosecute foreign infringers who would otherwise evade U.S. district courts. They have also led to charges that the ITC is protectionist and unfair to defendants and that it fosters inconsistency in U.S. patent law. Based on an …

Phillips V. Awh, Corp., A Doctrine Of Equivalents Case?, Natalie Sturicz

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

For a number of years, U.S. courts have noted that the doctrine of equivalents has been unworkable. This article explains that as American courts move toward a more holistic approach to claim interpretation, the doctrine of equivalents will become increasingly unnecessary as a means of expanding patent scope. The author asserts that adopting a "person having ordinary skill in the art" approach to claim interpretation and eliminating the doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement cases would benefit patent law in several ways: (1) when courts interpret patent claims from the perspective of a person reasonably skilled in the art, patentees …

The Experimental Use Exception And Undergraduate Engineering Projects, Henry L. Welch

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

The experimental use exception was originally conceived as a defense applicable when the infringing activities were philosophical. Over time the exception has evolved into a test of the profit motives of the infringer. Despite their status as non-profits, universities now find themselves under the same narrow interpretation of the experimental use exception as previously applied only to profit-seeking businesses. This article explains that the experimental use exception is still a viable defense to patent infringement for a student-sponsored capstone senior design project. In a student-sponsored capstone senior design project, the impetus and general direction of the project are provided almost …

Extraterritoriality In U.S. Patent Law, Timothy R. Holbrook

William & Mary Law Review

Globalization has eroded traditional territorial limits on intellectual property laws. Although this pressure was first seen in trademark and copyright law, recent court decisions have demonstrated that the territorial lines of U.S. patents are also under assault. Indeed, the Supreme Court recently considered extraterritoriality in U.S. patent law in its 2007 decision in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., discussed thoroughly in this Article. Courts and commentators have offered two primary approaches to deal with the issue of the extraterritorial reach of U.S. patents. First, many courts, including the Supreme Court, continue to adhere to a strict view of a patent's …

In Re Seagate: Did It Really Fix The Waiver Issue? A Short Review And Analysis Of Waiver Resulting From The Use Of A Counsel's Opinion Letter As A Defense To Willful Infringement, Dov Greenbaum

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

The Federal Circuit, through its decision in Seagate, sought to clarify and definitively establish various consequences of an assertion of willful infringement by a patentee. This comment discusses the history and potential outcomes of the Seagate decision; first, by outlining basic issues of privilege and immunity and examining the history of uncertainty regarding waiver leading up to the Seagate decision. The remainder of the comment examines the potential outcomes of the decision, and presents possible resolutions to further resolve the issue and more fully repair attorney-client privilege and immunity.

Contractual Expansion Of The Scope Of Patent Infringement Through Field-Of-Use Licensing, Mark R. Patterson

William & Mary Law Review

Patentees sometimes employ field-of-use licenses, under which they grant the right to use their inventions, but only in specified ways. Field-of-use licensing is often procompetitive, because the ability to provide different licensing terms for different users can encourage broader licensing of inventions. But in recent cases, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and several district courts have upheld field-of-use licenses that prohibited activities that would otherwise have been permitted by patent law, such as the repair and resale of patented products. By treating any violation of a license agreement as patent infringement, and by upholding license provisions that …

Secondary Liability For Actively Inducing Patent Infringement: Which Intentions Pave The Road? , Tal Kedem

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Breaking The Law To Break Into The Black: Patent Infringement As A Business Strategy , Eric C. Wrzesinski

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Corporations and businesses make important decisions everyday that affect their financial viability and market image. This article analyzes the phenomenon of patent infringement, considering whether firms consciously decide to infringe certain patents as a sound business strategy, or whether such cases arise spontaneously due to incomplete and careless research of prior art by infringing firms. The author considers the extent to which patent infringement may remain an effective business strategy for technology-producing firms, even when not employed willfully, due to the inadequate deterrence function of current U.S. patent laws.

Scope Of Protection: Comparison Of German And English Courts' Case Law, Sasa Bavec

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

This article examines the scope of patent protection granted in Germany and the United Kingdom (UK). The author aims to review the legal framework, practice, and case law on the issue of the interpretation of patent scope in Germany and the UK. The author also discusses the legal principles applied by courts in Germany and the UK in different patent cases and examines the differences in the application of patent application. The author concludes that the only significant difference between Germany and the UK that can be identified is the inability of German courts to decide on the validity of …

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.

Survey Of Patent Law Decisions In The Federal Circuit: 1998 In Review , Robert J. Mcmanus, Cindy Ahn, Christina Karnakis, Rafael E. Rodriguez, Jacqueline D. Wright

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Doctrine Of Equivalents Into The Year 2000: The Line Is Becoming Brighter For Some But Remains Dim For Others, William T. Kryger

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Under the holding of Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton-Davis Chemical Co., a court will not limit an inventor to the sole remedy of literal infringement. The inventor may also rely on the "doctrine of equivalents," which permits finding of infringement if there is equivalence between the elements of the accused product and the claimed elements of the patented invention. With this backdrop, Mr. Kryger analyzes the courts' struggle in developing a bright-line rule to protect patentees from piracy and fraud on their patents. Mr. Kryger first chronicles the evolution of the doctrine of equivalents through caselaw, particularly Graver Tank v. Linde …

Equity For Whom? Defining The Reach Of Non-Literal Patent Infringement, Peter K. Schalestock

Seattle University Law Review

The doctrine of equivalents began as a tool creating judicial flexibility to shield patent holders from piracy through minor variations on their inventions. Over time, two trends have transformed it from shield to sword. First, plaintiffs have persuaded courts to allow claims of infringement by equivalents even where there is no evidence of copying or other fraud. Second, as juries have decided more and more infringement cases, their sympathy for patent holders has had a greater impact on equivalents cases. Together, these trends have worked a gross distortion on the doctrine of equivalents. The doctrine should not be used to …