Law Commons^™

23andme Inc.: Patent Law And Lifestyle Genetics, Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

The venture, 23andMe Inc., raises a host of issues in respect of patent law, policy, and practice in respect of lifestyle genetics and personalised medicine. The company observes: ‘We recognize that the availability of personal genetic information raises important issues at the nexus of ethics, law, and public policy’. 23andMe Inc. has tested the boundaries of patent law, with its patent applications, which cut across information technology, medicine, and biotechnology. The company’s research raises fundamental issues about patentability, especially in light of the litigation in Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories Inc. and Association for Molecular Pathology …

Is The Prototypical Small Inventor At Risk Of Inadvertently Eliminating Their Traditional One-Year Grace Period Under The America Invents Act?, Eric A. Kelly

Eric A Kelly

This Comment interprets new statutory language appearing in the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, effective March 16, 2013, regarding what may constitute prior art and how prior art triggers the new one-year grace period. If this interpretation is followed, the vitally necessary grace period will continue to be accessible to inventors, especially small inventors. Specifically, this Comment recommends interpreting “or otherwise available to the public” as a public accessibility condition precedent that must be satisfied in order for public use and on sale events to constitute prior art; which as prior art then triggers the one-year grace period in which to …

Patents As Promoters Of Competition: The Guild Origins Of Patent Law In The Venetian Republic, Ted Sichelman, Sean O'Connor

San Diego Law Review

[T]his Article describes the artisan and merchant guild systems of the Venetian Republic. Part III explores the emergence of the patent system as a means for foreigners and Venetian citizens to compete with the guilds, as well as the eventual addition of negative exclusive rights to the basic license form of positive patent privileges. In so doing, contrary to the speculation of some scholars, we reject with near certainty the contention that the first patent law statute granting exclusionary rights for—in modern parlance—technological inventions was a silk-specific directive enacted by the Venetian Grand Council in the late fourteenth or early …

Secrets, Secrets Are No Fun! Balancing Patent Law & Trade Secret Law Under The America Invents Act, Stephen J. Elkind

Stephen J Elkind

This Note seeks to understand the tension between trade secrecy law and patent law pointed out by Judge Hand. Further, this Note argues that the recently enacted America Invents Act (“AIA”) overrules the holding from Metallizing Engineering that secret prior commercial use by an inventor before the critical date renders an invention unpatentable. Part I discusses the different incentive structures behind patents and trade secrets. Patent law requires that an invention achieve certain higher standards than trade secret law; and in doing so provides incentivizes for a different sort of invention than trade secret law. For commercial uses that are …

Standards Of Proof In Civil Litigation: An Experiment From Patent Law, Christopher B. Seaman

Christopher B. Seaman

No abstract provided.

Should Frand Patents Get Exclusion Orders?, Colleen Chien

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The America Invents Act Makes U.S. One Step Closer To First-To-File System, Aaron Gleaton

Intellectual Property Brief

No abstract provided.

Patenting Isolated Human Enhancer Elements And The Utility Requirement Problem, William B. Mcconnell

William B. McConnell

No abstract provided.

Finding Invention, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

One of the biggest problems plaguing modern patent law is its inability to provide predictable and clear exclusive rights. We would improve clarity by simply following the patent statute and extending exclusion only to "the patented invention." That suggestion, as reasonable as it may sound, is actually quite radical to the dominant patent law orthodoxy. It is not even clear under the dominant patent law orthodoxy what it would mean to limit patent scope to the invention, but it is generally presumed that it must lead to unacceptably narrow patents. Thus, even if it provides clarity, the invention is thought …

Rethinking Federal Circuit Jurisdiction, Paul Gugliuzza

Faculty Scholarship

Thirty years ago, Congress created the Federal Circuit for the overriding purpose of bringing uniformity to patent law. Yet less than half of the court’s cases are patent cases. Most Federal Circuit cases involve veterans benefits, government-employment actions, government contracts, and other matters. Although existing literature purports to study the Federal Circuit as an institution, these projects focus largely on the court’s patent cases. This Article, by contrast, considers whether the court’s nonpatent docket might affect the development of patent law and whether the court’s specialization in patent law has consequences for how it decides nonpatent cases.

These inquiries result …

Rules Versus Standards: Competing Notions Of Inconsistency Robustness In Patent Law, David S. Olson, Stefania Fusco

David S. Olson

This Article applies a new paradigm from the field of computer science—inconsistency robustness (IR)—in order to analyze the competing ways in which the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit craft patent law standards and rules. The IR paradigm is a shift from the previous paradigm of inconsistency elimination. The new IR paradigm recognizes that modern, complex information systems must perform notwithstanding persistent and continuous inconsistencies. The focus on IR encourages system designers to recognize the reality of persistent inconsistency when building robust systems that can perform reliably. Legal systems regularly process a great deal of complexity and inconsistency, and thus, by …

What Is The "Invention"?, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

Patent law is in flux, with recent disputes and changes in doctrine fueled by increased attention from the Supreme Court and en banc activity by the Federal Circuit. The natural reaction is to analyze each doctrinal area involved on its own. Upon a closer look, however, many patent cases concern a single, fundamental dispute. Conflicts in opinions on such issues as claim interpretation methodology and the written description requirement are really disagreements over which "invention" the courts should be considering. There are two concepts of invention currently in play in patent decisions. The first is an "external invention" definition, in …

Oh, The Places You'll Go: The Implications Of Current Patent Law On Embryonic Stem Cell Research, Stacy Kincaid

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.

Echoes From The Past: How The Federal Circuit Continues To Struggle With Patentable Subject Matter Post-Bilski, Jeff Thruston

Missouri Law Review

This Note will examine whether the cases comprising the eligible subject matter trio are inherently inconsistent. In looking at this issue, this Note will ask if Classen Immunotherapies can be reconciled with the patent eligibility trio, or if both the case and Judge Rader's concerns could have been dealt with more effectively by applying 35 U.S.C. § 101 as a last resort, and instead determining patent eligibility via 35 U.S.C. §§ 102, 103, and 112. It is fundamentally more difficult, expensive, and time consuming to ascertain which category of patentable subject matter a claimed invention falls into, or if the …

Patents And Regulatory Exclusivity, Rebecca S. Eisenberg

Book Chapters

This article reexamines the sources of exclusivity for drugs, considers their limitations, and evaluates exclusivity under the new biologics legislation in light of these limitations. The current overlapping legal protections for exclusivity in the pharmaceutical marketplace reflect a series of political compromises, repeatedly renegotiated to correct for unintended consequences in the previous version of the rules. Patents and patent challenges play a central role in this system of protection, and many of the patents at stake are ultimately held invalid in litigation. It is not easy to untangle a complex legal regime that allocates billions of dollars of profits. But …

Illuminating Innovation, Lea B. Shaver

Lea Shaver

The central justification offered for patent protection is the need to incentivize technological innovation. Yet to date there is little empirical evidence that this aim is achieved. This Article argues that historical case studies, exploring the impact of patent law on particular fields of technological innovation, can be especially helpful in providing an empirical foundation for patent scholarship. The Article then proceeds to offer one such case study, focused on one of the most important technological revolutions of the past two centuries: electrification. Although Thomas Edison and “the incandescent lamp” have been extensively studied, so far no one has asked …

Antitrust Rulemaking As A Solution To Abuse On The Standard-Setting Process, Adam Speegle

Michigan Law Review

While many recognize the critical role that technology plays in modern life, few appreciate the role that standards play in contributing to its success. Devices as prevalent as the modern laptop computer for example, may be governed by over 500 interoperability standards, regulating everything from the USB drive to the memory chip. To facilitate adoption of such standards, firms are increasingly turning to standard-setting organizations. These organizations consist of members of an industry who agree to abide by the organization's bylaws, which typically regard topics such as patent disclosure and reasonable licensing. Problems arise, however, when members violate these bylaws …

The Myth Of The Sole Inventor, Mark A. Lemley

Michigan Law Review

The theory of patent law is based on the idea that a lone genius can solve problems that stump the experts, and that the lone genius will do so only if properly incented. But the canonical story of the lone genius inventor is largely a myth. Surveys of hundreds of significant new technologies show that almost all of them are invented simultaneously or nearly simultaneously by two or more teams working independently of each other. Invention appears in significant part to be a social, not an individual, phenomenon. The result is a real problem for classic theories of patent law. …

Constructing Access Through Exclusion. The Effect Of Individual And Collective Patent Ownership And Licensing On Openness In Human Genomic Science, Geertrui R.L. Van Overwalle

Geertrui R.L. Van Overwalle

Human genomic science and intellectual property are often considered to be at odds. The present paper is an attempt to analyse the current problems in gene patenting through the lens of individual, multiple and collaborative ownership. The objective of the present chapter is to systematize the relation between modes of ownership, modes of licensing and their effect on access.

Individual and multiple ownership have different effects. Individual ownership may result in blocking patent positions and multiple ownership may lead to hindering patent thickets. Both phenomena frustrate follow-on innovation. The effect of individual and multiple ownership, blocking patents and patent thickets …

Patenting Abstractions, Miriam Bitton

Miriam Bitton

This Article explores the question of whether abstract ideas can and should be patentable. Historically, the patent system excluded abstract ideas from protection and the granting of patents was restricted to specific tangible products or processes. Recent advances in information technologies, however, have blurred the boundaries of the traditional doctrine, especially for abstract processes, and many recently filed patent applications and issued patents appear to protect abstractions per se. In view of the recent Supreme Court’s Bilski v. Kappos decision, which provided some new, but vague, guidance on subject matter eligibility thresholds, suggesting that the threshold is not as narrow …

Rescuing The Invention From The Cult Of The Claim, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Patent law is certainly a specialized field but I didn’t think it would be a cult. The term ‘invention’ appears in many critical statutory locations. Yet we have been taught, perhaps brainwashed, to give the term zero substantive import. Substantive use of the invention has been purged from patent doctrine. Instead every substantive question in patent law is answered by reference to the claims, the legal descriptions of the ‘metes and bounds’ of a patent’s exclusionary reach. Despite its promise of precision and uniformity, our modern invention-less system is anything but precise and uniform. This article argues that the trouble …

A Patent Prize System To Promote Development Of New Antibiotics And Conservation Of Existing Ones, Mark Nickas

Mark Nickas

Antibiotics are valuable drugs that fight bacterial infections, but our supply of antibiotics is at risk. Existing antibiotics gradually lose their effectiveness due to bacterial resistance, and few new antibiotics are being developed to replace them. A variety of models have been proposed to promote the conservation of existing antibiotics and/or incentivize private actors, i.e., drug companies, to develop new ones. Previous models, however, all encourage investment in antibiotic research and development via patent rights, which also create an incentive to oversell antibiotics. Because the inappropriate use of antibiotics accelerates the development of resistance, patent rights put the public health …

Duck, Duck, Bilski: Searching For A Law-Progress Equipoise, Eric Golas Salbert

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

Moore's Law generally asserts that the transistor capacity on a computer processing unit increases exponentially over time. To exemplify, in 1971, Intel's first microprocessor contained 2,300 transistors and was used in simple electronic pocket calculators and by 2007 Intel was manufacturing microprocessors containing 820,000,000 transistors used in personal computers capable of near-instantaneous worldwide communication over the Internet. When the framers of the Constitution drafted the empowering words, “To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts,” could they foresee such a blistering pace of innovation? Have courts been able to maintain the balance between progress and limited monopolies? The history …

The Impact Of Medimmune, Inc. V. Genentech, Inc. And Its Progeny On Technology Licensing, Michael Donovan

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

No abstract provided.

Student Intellectual Property Issues On The Entrepreneurial Campus, Bryce C. Pilz

Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review

This article examines issues that are more frequently arising for universities concerning intellectual property in student inventions. It seeks to identify the issue, explain the underlying law, identify actual and proposed solutions to these issues, and explain the legal ramifications of these potential solutions.

Burying, Robert Brendan Taylor

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

When applying for a patent, applicants must provide the examiner with all known material prior art. Those who fail to do so can be charged with inequitable conduct. But applicants can still effectively hide material prior art references by submitting them along with large quantities of immaterial prior art to the examiner. This deceptive practice, known as "burying," is generally not considered inequitable conduct. This Essay summarizes the current legal landscape concerning burying, discusses the costs associated with the practice, and suggests ways to deter and punish those who do it.

Patent Infringement As Criminal Conduct, Jacob S. Sherkow

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Criminal and civil law differ greatly in their use of the element of intent. The purposes of intent in each legal system are tailored to effectuate very different goals. The Supreme Court's recent decision in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 131 S. Ct. 2060 (2011), however, imported a criminal concept of intent--willful blindness--into the statute for patent infringement, a civil offense. This importation of a criminal law concept of intent into the patent statute is novel and calls for examination. This Article compares the purposes behind intent in criminal law with the purposes behind intent in patent law to …

An Explicit Policy Lever For Patent Scope, Anna B. Laakmann

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Since its inception in 1982, the Federal Circuit has declined to take an overt role in setting patent policy. Dan Burk and Mark Lemley have observed that the court instead implicitly engineers patent policy through selective application of its patentability rules, which operate as "policy levers." Recent decisions on the patentability of diagnostic and therapeutic methods illustrate a significant problem with this approach. By maintaining a façade of adjudicative rule formalism while tacitly manipulating its rules to approximate policy goals, the court perpetuates empirical uncertainty about the patent law's practical effects. This Article proposes that the Federal Circuit use the …

Improving Patent Notice And Remedies: A Critique Of The Ftc's 2011 Report, Alan Devlin

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

2011 was an eventful year for those interested in patent law. In March, the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") released a report that urges the Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") and courts to remedy perceived inadequacies underlying the U.S. patent system. The FTC observes that people of skill in the art routinely encounter difficulty in determining the meaning, and hence exclusive scope, of a patent's claims. Not only does this failure of notice stymie the efficient dispersion of technology throughout the economy, the FTC argues, but the judicial process can aggravate the problem by granting inappropriate remedies in patent-infringement cases. Then, …

Patents V. Statutory Exclusivities In Biological Pharmaceuticals - Do We Really Need Both, Yaniv Heled

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Over the past decade or so, the United States has been the arena of a boisterous debate regarding the creation of a new regulatory framework for the approval of generic versions of biologics-based pharmaceutical products (also known as "biological products" and "biologics")--an important and increasingly growing class of drugs. The basic purpose of such a framework is to create a fast and less-costly route to FDA approval for biologics that would be similar or identical to already-approved biological products--typically ones that are sold on the market at monopoly rates--thereby allowing cheaper versions of such medicines to enter the market. One …