Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Technically Speaking, Does It Matter? An Empirical Study Linking The Federal Circuit Judges' Technical Backgrounds To How They Analyze The Section 112 Enablement And Written Description Requirements, Dunstan H. Barnes
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Patent cases are decided exclusively by federal judges, who—unlike patent attorneys appearing before the United States Patent and Trademark Office—are not required to have any scientific or technical qualifications. The present empirical study explores whether there is a correlation between the technical backgrounds of judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and these judges’ analysis of the enablement and written description patent requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 112. The results indicate that Federal Circuit judges with technical backgrounds are more likely than their non-technical peers to reverse lower courts, but not significantly more likely to …
Judicial Overstating, Dan Simon, Nicholas Scurich
Judicial Overstating, Dan Simon, Nicholas Scurich
Chicago-Kent Law Review
Ostensibly, we are all Legal Realists now. No longer do legal theorists maintain that judicial decision making fits the mechanical and formalist characterizations of yesteryear. Yet, the predominant style of American appellate court opinions seems to adhere to that improbable mode of adjudication: habitually, opinions provide excessively large sets of syllogistic reasons and portray the chosen decision as certain, singularly correct, and as determined inevitably by the legal materials. This article examines two possible explanations for this rhetorical style of Judicial Overstatement. First, we review the psychological research that suggests that judicial overstatement is a product of the cognitive processes …