Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Institution
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Intellectual Property Law
Litigating Inequitable Conduct After Therasense, Exerge, And The Aia: Lessons For Litigants, Options For Owners, Lisa A. Dolak
Litigating Inequitable Conduct After Therasense, Exerge, And The Aia: Lessons For Litigants, Options For Owners, Lisa A. Dolak
Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property
Significant recent judicial and legislative developments have changed the way litigants and counsel need to plan for and litigate inequitable conduct allegations. Exergen and Therasense have heightened the standards for pleading and proving inequitable conduct, respectively, and Congress has expanded the patentee’s post-grant options for preempting or defeating inequitable conduct challenges. Without a doubt, the inequitable conduct litigation landscape has changed. Careful, thorough consideration of all of these developments and their implications is a must for any litigant or counsel faced with or considering asserting a charge of inequitable conduct. This paper discusses these significant recent inequitable conduct-related developments and …
Asserting Patents To Combat Infringement Via 3d Printing: It’S No “Use”, Daniel Harris Brean
Asserting Patents To Combat Infringement Via 3d Printing: It’S No “Use”, Daniel Harris Brean
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
Three-dimensional ("3D") printing technology, which enables physical objects to be "printed" as easily as words can be printed on a page, is rapidly moving from industrial settings into consumers' homes. The advent of consumer grade 3D printers fundamentally alters the traditional allocation of manufacturing infrastructure and sales activity. No longer do manufacturers need to make, sell, and ship physical products in their physical states. Rather, consumers may download digital representations of products over the Internet for printing in the comfort their own homes. For products sold in this fashion that are patented, this presents difficult hurdles to enforcement against infringers. …
Protection Of Intellectual Property Rights In Computers And Computer Programs: Recent Developments , Alan C. Rose
Protection Of Intellectual Property Rights In Computers And Computer Programs: Recent Developments , Alan C. Rose
Pepperdine Law Review
The following article examines the protection offered to computers and computer programs, under the various applicable patent, copyright and trade secret laws. Concerning patent protection; the author discusses the history and current status of the patent laws, and analyzes in detail the landmark case of Diamond v. Diehr. Discussed also is an analysis of copyright protection for computer programs, offered by the 1980 amendments to section 117 of the 1976 Copyright Act; which paved the way for the increased protection.
Eyes Wide Shut: Induced Patent Infringement And The Willful Blindness Standard, Kristin M. Hagen
Eyes Wide Shut: Induced Patent Infringement And The Willful Blindness Standard, Kristin M. Hagen
Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review
None.
A Great Invisible Crashing: The Rise And Fall Of Patent Eligibility Through Mayo V. Prometheus, Scott Pierce
A Great Invisible Crashing: The Rise And Fall Of Patent Eligibility Through Mayo V. Prometheus, Scott Pierce
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal
Title 35 of the United States Code at Section 101 states that “[w]hoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.” Despite the apparent simplicity of the statute and its predecessors, the boundaries of patent eligibility dictated by the term “process” and the term “art” that it replaced, along with the terms “machine,” “manufacture” and “composition of matter,” have become increasingly uncertain over the course of the last two-hundred years. Recently, the lack …
Logic, Not Evidence, Supports A Change In Expert Testimony Standards: Why Evidentiary Standards Promulgated By The Supreme Court For Scientific Expert Testimony Are Inappropriate And Inefficient When Applied In Patent Infringement Suits, Claire R. Rollor
Journal of Business & Technology Law
No abstract provided.
A Last Step Rule For Direct Infringement Of Process Claims: Clarifying Indirect Infringement And Narrowing Joint Infringement, Stephen W. Moore
A Last Step Rule For Direct Infringement Of Process Claims: Clarifying Indirect Infringement And Narrowing Joint Infringement, Stephen W. Moore
Cleveland State Law Review
This Note proposes that the party who performs the last step of a patented process should be liable for direct infringement. Under this “Last Step Rule,” patented products and processes would be treated similarly—which is consistent with past decisions and is implied in the patent statute. As will be shown in this Note, adopting the Last Step Rule would make finding indirect patent infringement more straightforward and would limit the doctrine of joint infringement to claims for direct infringement. The proposed rule will be shown to be logically sound, supported by case law precedent, and consistent with the language and …