Law Commons^™

The Empire Of Cancer: Gene Patents And Cancer Voices, Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

In his book, The Emperor of All Maladies, Siddhartha Mukherjee writes a history of cancer — ‘It is a chronicle of an ancient disease — once a clandestine, “whispered-about” illness — that has metamorphosed into a lethal shape-shifting entity imbued with such penetrating metaphorical, medical, scientific, and political potency that cancer is often described as the defining plague of our generation’.Increasingly, an important theme in the history of cancer is the role of law, particularly in the field of intellectual property law. It is striking that a number of contemporary policy debates over intellectual property and public health have concerned …

Calming Unsettled Waters: A Proposal For Navigating The Tenuous Power Divide Between The Federal Courts And The Uspto Under The American Invents Act, William Rose

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Intellectual Property Policy, Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

Patent Searching Using The Uspto Public Website, Amy Jansen, Robert Berry

Librarian Publications

Presentations which guides the layman through the basics of using the USPTO website, including the 7 steps of a preliminary patent search.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office website: http://www.uspto.gov/

A Submission To The House Of Representatives Standing Committee On Social Policy And Legal Affairs On The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013 (Cth), Matthew Rimmer

Matthew Rimmer

The amendments contained in the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2013 (Cth) are designed to provide safeguards in relation to patent law and the public interest.In the 2012 case on plain packaging, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, Robert French, emphasized that the role of intellectual property law is to promote public objectives. His Honour observed: ‘There are and always have been purposive elements reflecting public policy considerations which inform the statutory creation of intellectual property rights.’ Discussing the role of patent law, Chief Justice Robert French commented:The Patents Act 1990 (Cth) provides that a patent gives …

The Changing Guard Of Patent Law: Chevron Deference For The Pto, Melissa F. Wasserman

William & Mary Law Review

Whereas Congress has increasingly turned to administrative agencies to regulate complex technical areas, the patent system has remarkably remained an outlier. In the patent arena, the judiciary— not a federal agency—is perceived to be the most important expositor of substantive patent law standards. Yet, as the criticism toward the patent system has grown, so too have the challenges to this unusual power dynamic. The calls for institutional reform culminated in late 2011 with the enactment of the historic Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). Although scholars have recognized that the AIA bestows a glut of new powers upon the United States …

The Federal Circuit As A Federal Court, Paul R. Gugliuzza

William & Mary Law Review

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction over patent appeals and, as a consequence, the last word on many legal issues important to innovation policy. This Article shows how the Federal Circuit augments its already significant power by impeding other government institutions from influencing the patent system. Specifically, the Federal Circuit has shaped patent-law doctrine, along with rules of jurisdiction, procedure, and administrative law, to preserve and expand the court's power in four interinstitutional relationships: the court's federalism relationship with state courts, its separation of powers relationship with the executive and legislative branches, its vertical …

What Should Be Patentable? A Proposal For Determining The Existence Of Statutory Subject Matter Under 35 U.S.C. Sec. 101, Andrew Beckerman Rodau

Andrew Beckerman Rodau

The question of what type of inventions should be protectable under patent law is a controversial issue that has received significant attention. Recent Supreme Court decisions reject a bright line test in favor of a more-opened ended approach to determining patent eligibility. Unfortunately, this provides limited guidance to lower courts and consequently the issue remains unsettled. Most inventions fit within the statutory requirements defining patent-eligible inventions. This article will examine the scope of patent-eligible subject matter defined by patent law section 101. It will look at judicial interpretation of the statute including exceptions judicially engrafted onto the statute by the …

Novelty Grace Periods: A National Law Survey, Frederik Struve

Student Scholarship

This survey includes all national law statutes (known to the author), conveying broader rights when compared with Article 55 of the European Patent Convention. The statutes provided in this survey have primarily been retrieved from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and from national patent offices where appropriate. Links to the materials used are provided after each statute.

Briefly, the survey documents that 72 countries offer broader rights to applicants, when compared with EPC Article 55. Of those countries, 46 include the right to claim priority under the Paris Convention. In all, 61 contracting states to the Patent Cooperation Treaty …

Can Federal Courts Exercise Jurisdiction Over State Law Malpractice Claims Arising Out Of Patent Law Disputes?, Isaac C. Ta

St. Mary's Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1338, federal courts generally have original jurisdiction over cases arising under federal civil law. Specifically, under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a), federal courts have jurisdiction over cases brought under federal patent laws. As with any legal proceeding, the potential for legal malpractice as it relates to patent issues (e.g., proper patent filing) is very real. However, unlike patent law proceedings, legal malpractice is governed by state law.' When the two causes of action are intertwined, federal and state courts are presented with the issue of which court possesses proper jurisdiction. Some argue federal courts can properly exercise …

Intellectual Property Defenses, Gideon Parchomovsky, Alex Stein

All Faculty Scholarship

In this Essay, we offer an integrated theory of intellectual property defenses. We demonstrate that all intellectual property defenses can be fitted into three conceptual categories: general, individualized and class defenses. A general defense is the inverse of a right in rem. It goes to the validity of the intellectual property right asserted by the plaintiff, and when raised successfully it relieves not only the actual defendant, but also the public at large, of the duty to comply with the plaintiff’s intellectual property right. An individualized defense, as we define it, is the inverse of an in personam right: it …

The Indeterminacy Critique And The Trespass Fallacy, Shine Tu

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Alappat Redux: Support For Functional Language In Software Patent Claims, Andrew Chin

Faculty Publications

The Federal Circuit has suggested in some recent cases that any algorithm can serve as adequate structural support for a means-plus-function element in a software patent claim under § 112(f). A recent proposal by Mark Lemley fully endorses this proposition and seeks its broader application. The concept of an algorithm, however, is too slippery to serve as the basis for such a rule. In this Article, I argue that this overreliance on the algorithm concept originated in a revisionist gloss on the Federal Circuit's 1994 Alappat decision. Informed by a closer reading of what Alappat actually has to say about …

Standards Of Proof In Civil Litigation: An Experiment From Patent Law (With C. Seaman), David Schwartz

David L. Schwartz

Standards of proof are widely assumed to matter in litigation. They operate to allocate the risk of error between litigants, as well as to indicate the relative importance attached to the ultimate decision. But despite their perceived importance, there have been relatively few empirical studies testing jurors’ comprehension and application of standards of proof, particularly in civil litigation.

Patent law recently presented an opportunity to assess the potential impact of varying the standard of proof in civil cases. In Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, the Supreme Court held that a patent’s presumption of validity can only be overcome by …