Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Rule Of Reason, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
The Rule Of Reason, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
Antitrust’s rule of reason was born out of a thirty-year (1897-1927) division among Supreme Court Justices about the proper way to assess multi-firm restraints on competition. By the late 1920s the basic contours of the rule for restraints among competitors was roughly established. Antitrust policy toward vertical restraints remained much more unstable, however, largely because their effects were so poorly understood.
This article provides a litigation field guide for antitrust claims under the rule of reason – or more precisely, for situations when application of the rule of reason is likely. At the time pleadings are drafted and even up …
What Patent Attorney Fee Awards Really Look Like, Saurabh Vishnubhakat
What Patent Attorney Fee Awards Really Look Like, Saurabh Vishnubhakat
Faculty Scholarship
This essay gives an empirical account of attorney fee awards over the last decade of patent litigation. Given the current attention in legislative proposals and on the Supreme Court’s docket to more liberal fee shifting as a check on abusive patent litigation, a fuller descriptive understanding of the current regime is of utmost importance to forming sound patent litigation policy. Following a brief overview of judicial experience in patent cases and trends in patent case filing, this study presents analysis of over 200 attorney fee award orders during 2003-2013.
The study confirms the commonsense view that plaintiffs have tended to …
Brief Of Amici Curiae Law, Business, And Economics Scholars In Alice Corp. V. Cls Bank, No. 13-298, Jason Schultz, Brian Love, James Bessen, Michael J. Meurer
Brief Of Amici Curiae Law, Business, And Economics Scholars In Alice Corp. V. Cls Bank, No. 13-298, Jason Schultz, Brian Love, James Bessen, Michael J. Meurer
Faculty Scholarship
The Federal Circuit’s expansion of patentable subject matter in the 1990s led to a threefold increase in software patents, many of which contain abstract ideas merely tethered to a general-purpose computer. There is little evidence, however, to suggest this expansion has produced an increase in software innovation. The software industry was highly innovative in the decade immediately prior to this expansion, when the viability of software patentability was unclear and software patents were few. When surveyed, most software developers oppose software patenting, and, in practice, software innovators tend to rely on other tools to capture market share such as first-mover …
Preliminary Injunctions Post-Mayo And Myriad, Jacob S. Sherkow
Preliminary Injunctions Post-Mayo And Myriad, Jacob S. Sherkow
Articles & Chapters
The Supreme Court's recent interest in patentable subject matter has had several, unexpected downstream effects on preliminary injunctions in patent disputes.
The Supreme Court has recently expressed increased interest in patent eligibility, or patentable subject matter, the doctrine that limits the types of inventions eligible for patenting. Its two decisions, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., in 2012, and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., in 2013, represented the first broad restrictions on patentable subject matter in over thirty years. And later this term, the Court will decide yet another patent eligibility case: Alice Corp. v. CLS …
Patent Exclusions And Antitrust After Therasense, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Patent Exclusions And Antitrust After Therasense, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
A patent may be held invalid if it was obtained by “inequitable conduct” before the PTO during the process of patent prosecution. In its Therasense decision the Federal Circuit imposed severe requirements against those attempting to defend against a patent on the basis of inequitable conduct, insisting that inequitable conduct be measured essentially by a subjective test. Objective “reasonable person” tests such as negligence or even gross negligence will not suffice. By contrast, the Supreme Court has insisted that the conduct giving rise to a wrongful infringement action violating the antitrust laws be initially based on an objective test – …
Harm To Competition Or Innovation, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Harm To Competition Or Innovation, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
This book of CASES AND MATERIALS ON INNOVATION AND COMPETITION POLICY is intended for educational use. The book is free for all to use subject to an open source license agreement. It differs from IP/antitrust casebooks in that it considers numerous sources of competition policy in addition to antitrust, including those that emanate from the intellectual property laws themselves, and also related issues such as the relationship between market structure and innovation, the competitive consequences of regulatory rules governing technology competition such as net neutrality and interconnection, misuse, the first sale doctrine, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Chapters …
Certain Patents, Alan C. Marco, Saurabh Vishnubhakat
Certain Patents, Alan C. Marco, Saurabh Vishnubhakat
Faculty Scholarship
This Article presents the first in a series of studies of stock market reactions to the legal outcomes of patent cases. From a sample of patents litigated during a 20-year period, we estimate market reactions to patent litigation decisions and to patent grants. These estimates reveal that the resolution of legal uncertainty over patent validity and patent infringement is, on average, worth as much to a firm as is the initial grant of the patent right. Each is worth about 1.0-1.5% excess returns on investment. There are significant differences between such market reactions before and after the establishment in 1982 …
Learning From Litigation: What Can Lawsuits Teach Us About The Role Of Human Gene Patents In Research And Innovation, Christopher M. Holman
Learning From Litigation: What Can Lawsuits Teach Us About The Role Of Human Gene Patents In Research And Innovation, Christopher M. Holman
Faculty Works
In 2007, I published an article entitled "The Impact of Human Gene Patents on Innovation and Access: A Survey of Human Gene Patent Litigation," in which I reported the results of a project to identify and characterize all instances in which a human gene patent was asserted in a lawsuit. For the purposes of this study, I essentially treated any US patent claiming a product or process involving one or more specific human genes as a "human gene patent."
In the present article I explore in greater depth some of the implications of the 2007 study, and discuss some general …
Cross-Border Injunctions In U.S. Patent Cases And Their Enforcement Abroad, Marketa Trimble
Cross-Border Injunctions In U.S. Patent Cases And Their Enforcement Abroad, Marketa Trimble
Scholarly Works
In surveying recent literature on difficulties with cross-border injunctions in patent cases, one may conclude that the problem appears to be limited to the phenomenon of pan-European injunctions granted by some courts in Europe in cases concerning infringements of foreign patents. However, even in cases concerning domestic patents, injunctions reaching beyond national borders can be issued; the empirical evidence presented in the paper demonstrates a variety of such instances in U.S. patent cases. Certainly the existence of such injunctions in the U.S. raises concerns about their enforceability in other countries, particularly when they are issued against a foreign entity that …
The Walker Process Doctrine: Infringement Lawsuits As Antitrust Violations, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
The Walker Process Doctrine: Infringement Lawsuits As Antitrust Violations, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
Antitrust law's Walker Process doctrine permits a patent infringement defendant to show that an improperly maintained infringement action constitutes unlawful monopolization or an unlawful attempt to monopolize. The infringement defendant must show both that the lawsuit is improper, which establishes the conduct portion of the violation and generally satisfies tort law requirements, and also that the structural prerequisites for the monopolization offense are present. The doctrine also applies to non-patent infringement actions and has been applied by the Supreme Court to copyright infringement actions. Walker Process itself somewhat loosely derives from the Supreme Court's Noerr-Pennington line of cases holding that …
Ip And Antitrust Policy: A Brief Historical Overview, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
Ip And Antitrust Policy: A Brief Historical Overview, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
The history of IP/antitrust litigation is filled with exaggerated notions of the power conferred by IP rights and imagined threats to competition. The result is that antitrust litigation involving IP practices has seen problems where none existed. To be sure, finding the right balance between maintaining competition and creating incentives to innovate is no easy task. However, the judge in an IP/antitrust case almost never needs to do the balancing, most of which is done in the language of the IP provisions. The role of antitrust tribunals is the much more limited one of ensuring that any alleged threat to …
Reforming Patent Validity Litigation: The "Dubious Preponderance", Mark D. Janis
Reforming Patent Validity Litigation: The "Dubious Preponderance", Mark D. Janis
Articles by Maurer Faculty
No abstract provided.
Law And Fact In Patent Litigation: Form Versus Function, Thomas G. Field Jr
Law And Fact In Patent Litigation: Form Versus Function, Thomas G. Field Jr
Law Faculty Scholarship
Recently, the Supreme Court sent Dennison Mfg. v. Panduit Corp. back to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). It remanded with explicit directions that the lower court consider the extent to which Rule 52(a) governs appellate review of determinations of obviousness.
It is by no means certain that obviousness determinations should be treated as questions of law. Nevertheless, there is ample evidence that courts seek to review findings of obviousness (or nonobviousness) more intensely than would be appropriate under the "clearly erroneous" or "substantial evidence" standards. If the courts are inclined to persist in more intense review …