Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Delaying Competition: How Sound Public Policy And Rigorous Antitrust Scrutiny Can Be Applied To Controversial Patent Settlements, 17 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 655 (2018), Sam Hensel

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The rising costs of prescription drugs are a growing concern for many Americans. The restraint of trade for pharmaceutical drugs is a cause of rising costs for consumers, as companies seek to push potential competitors out of the market to maintain profits. This unlawful restraint of trade will be discussed in this comment. Specifically, this comment will focus on "Pay for Delay" agreements, mostly between generic versus brand name pharmaceutical manufacturers. The proliferation of these agreements only leads to an unsustainable market that discourages innovation and advancement, and promotes fraud, as invalid patents are used as leverage to prevent generics …

Avoiding The Chaos Of Maryjane - A Conventional Approach To Intellectual Property Protection Of Marijuana, 17 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 278 (2017), Kaylee Willis

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Whether you are considering the ever-popular recreational use, or recent medicinal developments, marijuana is a highly discussed controversial substance. With revenue from marijuana into the billions of dollars, it is no wonder it has been trying to reach into the intellectual property arena. This comment specifically looks into the patent arena and the obstacles that come with an attempt to seek, and enforce protection of marijuana-based patent applications. With the USPTO’s plant and utility patent options, there is perhaps more than one way to pass marijuana-based substances as patent-eligible subject matter. The largest obstacle for this type of intellectual property …

Big Pharma Versus Inter Partes Review: Why The Pharmaceutical Industry Should Seek Logical Hatch-Waxman Reform Over Inter Partes Review Exemption, 50 J. Marshall L. Rev. 337 (2017), Francisco Javier Espinosa

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Protecting Trade Secrets Under International Investment Law: What Secrets Investors Should Not Tell States, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 228 (2016), Daria Kim

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The article addresses specifics of trade secret protection under international investment law. As a particular example, it analyzes protection of pharmaceutical regulatory data against the background of the growing public policy campaign for broader access to clinical trial data and the recent unprecedented practice of the European Medicines Agency of disclosing clinical dossiers submitted for drug marketing approval. Given the significant role of foreign direct investment in the global pharmaceutical industry and substantial, exponentially increasing costs incurred by drug originator companies in conducting clinical trials, the prospect of investor-state dispute over data disclosure does not appear purely hypothetical. The question …

The Art Of Food Placement: Will The U.S. Follow Germany's Lead In Copyrighting Artistic Food Placement?, 15 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 565 (2016), Julianna Walo

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Recently, German courts created groundbreaking precedent allowing copyright protection for the artistic placement of food on a plate. The rulings allow chefs to prohibit people from taking pictures of the copyrighted food placement. While Germany’s moral-based legal system allows for such copyright protections, this comment compares the U.S. legal system to that of Germany and examines if and how such copyright protection could extend to food placement in the U.S.

Hatch-Waxman’S Safe-Harbor Provision For Pharmaceutical Development: A Free Ride For Patent Infringers?, 13 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 445 (2014), Kate Y. Jung

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The Safe-Harbor provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act allows generic drug manufacturers to use a patented invention during pre-market testing of generic drugs. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent interpretation of the Safe-Harbor provision in Momenta Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Amphastar Pharmaceuticals, Inc. created controversy when it extended the Safe-Harbor exemption to post-FDA approval. This extension was done in an unprecedented manner and would “allow almost all activity by pharmaceutical companies to constitute ‘submission’ and therefore justify a free license to trespass.” The U.S. Supreme Court has yet to settle this matter, and courts are now faced …

3(D) View Of India’S Patent Law: Social Justice Aspiration Meets Property Rights In Novartis V. Union Of India & Others, 13 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 719 (2014), Saby Ghoshray

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Not many constitutional decisions from developing countries find themselves at the center of global debate like the Indian Supreme Court’s Novartis decision invalidating the Gleevec patent. The patent was invalidated under amended Section 3(d) of the Indian Patents Act, which was amended to address some of the concerns of imbalance between the maximalist and minimalist cultures in the pharmaceutical context. Section 3(d) of the Indian Patent Act introduced a new threshold of patent eligibility for pharmaceutical innovation that requires applicants to demonstrate enhanced efficacy of their products. The objective of this Article is to get beyond the reactionary reviews of …

Food Art: Protecting "Food Presentation" Under U.S. Intellectual Property Law, 14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 1 (2014), Cathay Smith

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

In 2006, a scandal broke in the culinary world. It was alleged that Robin Wickens, chef at (now closed) Interlude restaurant in Melbourne, Australia, had copied dishes by renowned American chefs Wylie Dufresne, Jose Andres, and Grant Achatz. It is not uncommon for chefs to borrow recipes from other chefs, and there has been a long culture of sharing in the cuisine industry. However, what made Wickens’ actions scandalous was that he had purportedly copied the artistic presentation and plating of other chefs’ dishes, not just their recipes.

This Article examines whether chefs can protect the artistic presentation or plating …

Fighting Poison With Poison? The Chinese Experience With Pharmaceutical Patent Linkage, 11 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 623 (2012), Benjamin Liu

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Countries after countries are adopting a controversial regulatory system of linking the market approval for pharmaceuticals to the status of potentially blocking patents as part of their bilateral and multilateral trade agreement package with the United States. Surprisingly, China took up pharmaceutical patent linkage in the absence of any treaty obligations and became the first country to adopt this regulatory regime outside of North America, despite the presence of a flourishing generics pharmaceutical industry and its developing country status. In fact, the Chinese regulation promised more intellectual property ("IP") protection than what even the United States FDA is capable of …

Updating The Patent System's Novelty Requirement To Promote Small-Molecule Medicinal Progress, 45 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1151 (2012), Jason Brewer

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Patent Office As Biosecurity Gatekeeper: Fostering Responsible Science And Building Public Trust In Diy Science, 10 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 423 (2011), Brian J. Gorman

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

When the fields of intellectual property law and biotechnology intersect, most analysis is driven byeconomic and ethical issues. This article examines these factors, but in relation to the emerging security threat posed by biohackers, or do-it-yourself (“DIY”) scientists, who operate free from oversight and industry norms at the fringes of the biotechnology community. Public health risks are poised to grow as these citizen-scientists race for lucrative discoveries in the new frontier of syntheticbiology. This article proposes that the existing paradigm adjust accordingly to leverage regulatory compliance from the most ambitious biohackers looking to benefit from patent protection. The U.S. government …

The Impact Of The Biosimilars Provision Of The Health Care Reform Bill On Innovation Investments, 10 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 553 (2011), Katherine N. Addison

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 provides an abbreviated FDA approval pathway for biosimilars. The passage of this biosimilar legislation is a positive step toward retaining a robust biotechnology industry in the United States while also protecting innovators. The Act’s increased FDA exclusivity is welcome, but FDA exclusivity alone is insufficient to encourage and protect innovation and investment in biosimilars. Instead, the exclusivity provided by a patent term, together with the ability to adjust this term to compensate an applicant for U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and FDA delays, is necessary to ensure development of highly specialized …

Deadly Delay / Postponed Pills, 10 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 254 (2010), Christopher R. Walker

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

Since 1984, generic pharmaceuticals have continued to grow, and are an important element in our national struggle to increase affordable health care options in the United States. The Hatch-Waxman Act has played a pivotal role in helping to create a regulatory environment that fosters the development of generic pharmaceuticals, thereby increasing access to lower-cost alternatives to more expensive drugs. An important part of balancing the interests of the generic manufacturers against those of the primary pharmaceutical makers is the thirty-month stay provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act. This comment begins by taking a look at the history of the Hatch-Waxman Act …

Has The Supreme Court Incorrectly Expanded § 271(E)(1) To Risk A Regulatory Taking?, 5 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 216 (2006), Tara Stuart

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The U.S.S.C. expanded the scope of the Hatch-Waxman Act’s safe harbor provision in Merck III to include protection for infringing use of any type of invention as long as a researcher intended to perform research reasonably relevant to FDA approval. This broad interpretation is inconsistent with the legislative intent of the Hatch-Waxman Act, and the policies of the U.S. patent system. Many patent owners may unnecessarily experience such a reduction in their property rights as to constitute a regulatory taking. The proposed narrow interpretation would rectify the constitutional problems and inconsistencies in infringement exemptions. Section 271(e)(1) should apply only to …

Suppression Of Innovation Or Collaborative Efficiencies?: An Antitrust Analysis Of A Research & Development Collaboration That Led To The Shelving Of A Promising Drug, 5 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 348 (2006), Saami Zain

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

This article discusses antitrust issues present in research and development collaborations between competitors. In particular, it illustrates that, although often very beneficial, these collaborations may have the potential for considerable harm via suppression of innovation. The article examines a recent case involving a collaboration to develop drugs, which arguably resulted in the suppression of a promising drug.

"As The Federal Circuit Turns": The Supreme Court's Consideration Of Merck V. Integra And The Safe Harbor Provision, 4 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 368 (2005), Blair M. Jacobs, Christina A. Ondrick

UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law

The Hatch-Waxman Act was enacted to balance the competing interests in the pharmaceutical marketplace between brand name and generic drug manufacturers. In the twenty years since its inception, the safe harbor provision contained in § 271(e)(1), has been interpreted to provide broad protection to those involved in research activities. However, in 2003, the Federal Circuit narrowly interpreted the safe harbor provision in a move that could potentially frustrate future research and improvements on patented technologies. Merck v. Integra is currently before the United States Supreme Court, who has the challenge of unraveling the competing interests involved. In order to encourage …

Regulating The Regulators: The Impact Of Fda Regulation On Corporations' First Amendment Rights, 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 95 (2005), Lisa M. Fealk-Stickler

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Public Use Or Experimental Use: Are Clinical Trials Susceptible To Another Attack Similar To That In Smithkline Beecham Corp. V. Apotex Corp., 39 J. Marshall L. Rev. 149 (2005), Nimalka Wickramasekera

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Effectiveness Of International Enforcement Of Intellectual Property Rights, 37 J. Marshall L. Rev. 985 (2004), Allison Cychosz

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Computer-Aided Drug Design Using Patented Compounds: Infringement In Cyberspace?, 34 J. Marshall L. Rev. 1001 (2001), Ted L. Field

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Deleting The Bolar Amendment To The Hatch-Waxman Act: Harmonizing Pharmaceutical Patent Protection In A Global Village, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 751 (1999), Ned Milenkovich

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Licensed To Steal: Has Sovereign Immunity Gone Too Far, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 779 (1999), Sulaiman M. Qazi

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

It's A Wonderful Genome: The Written-Description Requirement Protects The Human Genome From Overly-Broad Patents, 32 J. Marshall L. Rev. 805 (1999), Emanuel Vacchiano

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Definite And Permanent Idea - Invention In The Pharmaceutical And Chemical Sciences And The Determination Of Conception In Patent Law, 28 J. Marshall L. Rev. 687 (1995), Jackie Hutter

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.

Elimination Of Process: Will The Biotechnology Patent Protection Act Revive Process Patents, 24 J. Marshall L. Rev. 263 (1990), Kerin Kelly

UIC Law Review

No abstract provided.