Law Commons^™

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 …

Extraterritorial Criminal Jurisdiction Under The Antitrust Laws, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

The Ninth Circuit may soon consider whether challenges to antitrust activity that occurs abroad must invariably be addressed under the rule of reason, which will make criminal prosecution difficult or impossible.

When antitrust cases involve foreign conduct, the courts customarily appraise its substantive antitrust significance only after deciding whether the Sherman Act reaches the activity. Nevertheless, "jurisdictional" and "substantive" inquiries are not wholly independent. Both reflect two sound propositions: that Congress did not intend American antitrust law to rule the entire commercial world and that Congress knew that domestic economic circumstances often differ from those abroad where mechanical application of …

Antitrust's "Jurisdictional" Reach Abroad, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

In its Arbaugh decision the Supreme Court insisted that a federal statute’s limitation on reach be regarded as “jurisdictional” only if the legislature was clear that this is what it had in mind. The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvement Act (FTAIA) presents a puzzle in this regard, because Congress seems to have been quite clear about what it had in mind; it simply failed to use the correct set of buzzwords in the statute itself, and well before Arbaugh assessed this requirement.

Even if the FTAIA is to be regarded as non-jurisdictional, the constitutional extraterritorial reach of the Sherman Act is …

Slides: Water Leasing In The Lower Arkansas Valley: The "Super Ditch Company", Peter Nichols

Western Water Law, Policy and Management: Ripples, Currents, and New Channels for Inquiry (Martz Summer Conference, June 3-5)

Presenter: Peter NIchols, Trout, Raley, Montano, Witwer & Freeman, Denver, CO

28 slides

Transnational Regulatory Litigation, Hannah Buxbaum

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Recent years have seen much debate about the role of national courts in addressing global harms. That debate has focused on the application by domestic courts of international law - for instance, in civil actions brought in U.S. courts to enforce human rights law. This article identifies a parallel development in the area of economic regulation. It classifies and analyzes a category of cases that seek the application of regulatory law by domestic courts in situations involving global economic misconduct. Like the public international law cases, these cases highlight the tension between the benefits to be gained by enhanced enforcement …

The "Comity" Of Empagran: The Supreme Court Decides That Foreign Competition Regulation Limits American Antitrust Jurisdiction Over International Cartels, Sam F. Halabi

Faculty Publications

The equivocal language of the 1982 Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act ("FTAIA") has led to several disputes concerning when victims of international price-fixing can bring suit under U.S. antitrust law. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in E Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd. v. Empagran S.A. ("Empagran") that the doctrine of "comity among nations" limited the reach of U.S. anti-trust law over foreign plaintiffs who claim injury in nations where other competition regulations exist. This article argues that Empagran misapplies the doctrine of comity. Part II traces the history of the FTAIA, which was passed to define the limits on participation by …

May A Foreign Plaintiff Sue A Foreign Defendant For Conduct Outside The U.S. That Caused Antitrust Injury Outside The U.S.?, Antonio F. Perez

Scholarly Articles

May the respondents, five foreign companies that purchased goods outside the United States from other foreign companies, pursue Sherman Act claims seeking recovery for overcharges paid in transactions occurring entirely outside U.S. commerce under the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA), 15 U.S.C. § 6a? Do such foreign plaintiffs lack standing under Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15(a)?