Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- 35 U.S.C. § 101 (1)
- Algorithms (1)
- Alice (1)
- Board of Contract Appeals (1)
- Caseloads (1)
-
- Certiorari (1)
- Circuit splits (1)
- Claim Constriction (1)
- Common law (1)
- Copyright (1)
- Court of Federal Claims (1)
- DNA (1)
- DNA Mixture (1)
- Doctrinal exclusions (1)
- Federal Circuit (1)
- Field splits (1)
- Forensic Evidence (1)
- Fundamental building blocks of science (1)
- Innovation (1)
- Invention (1)
- Market prospect (1)
- Mayo (1)
- Merit Systems Protection Board (1)
- Patent Law (1)
- Patent System (1)
- Patent law (1)
- Patents (1)
- Patents; Patent; Patentee; Intellectual Property; License; Bundle; Hohfeld; Trolls; Exhaustion; Laches; In Rem; In Personam; The License On Transfer; LOT; Frand Commitments; Rights; Right To Exclude (1)
- Secret Algorithms (1)
- Sentencing (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
The First Amendment Case For Public Access To Secret Algorithms Used In Criminal Trials, Vera Eidelman
The First Amendment Case For Public Access To Secret Algorithms Used In Criminal Trials, Vera Eidelman
Georgia State University Law Review
As this Article sets forth, once a computerized algorithm is used by the government, constitutional rights may attach. And, at the very least, those rights require that algorithms used by the government as evidence in criminal trials be made available—both to litigants and the public. Scholars have discussed how the government’s refusal to disclose such algorithms runs afoul of defendants’ constitutional rights, but few have considered the public’s interest in these algorithms—or the widespread impact that public disclosure and auditing could have on ensuring their quality.
This Article aims to add to that discussion by setting forth a theory of …
Patent Transfer And The Bundle Of Rights, Andrew C. Michaels
Patent Transfer And The Bundle Of Rights, Andrew C. Michaels
Brooklyn Law Review
When patents subject to a license agreement are transferred, to what extent do the benefits and burdens of the license agreement run with the patent? Courts have stated that those aspects of the agreement relating to “actual use” of the patent or invention are encumbrances running with the transferred patent. But this doctrinal test is not consistently applied and is not up to the task of clearly and consistently delineating the extent to which patent license agreements run with transferred patents. Conceptualizing the patent as a bundle of Hohfeldian Rights to exclude, this article proposes a more coherent framework for …
Certiorari, Universality, And A Patent Puzzle, Tejas N. Narechania
Certiorari, Universality, And A Patent Puzzle, Tejas N. Narechania
Michigan Law Review
The most important determinant of a case’s chances for Supreme Court review is a circuit split: If two courts of appeals have decided the same issue differently, review is substantially more likely. But practically every appeal in a patent case makes its way to a single court—the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. How, then, does the Supreme Court decide whether to grant certiorari in a patent case?
The petitions for certiorari in the Court’s patent docket suggest an answer: The Supreme Court looks for splits anyway. These splits, however, are of a different sort. Rather than consider whether …
The Supreme Court And The Federal Circuit Turn Patent Infringement Venue Jurisprudence Upside Down, Robert Tapparo
The Supreme Court And The Federal Circuit Turn Patent Infringement Venue Jurisprudence Upside Down, Robert Tapparo
American University Business Law Review
No abstract provided.
Federal Circuit Jurisdiction: Looking Back And Thinking Forward, Timothy B. Dyk
Federal Circuit Jurisdiction: Looking Back And Thinking Forward, Timothy B. Dyk
American University Law Review
No abstract provided.
Patent Eligibility's Doctrinal Exclusions... Lately, A Scary Movie Too Difficult To Watch: Concrete Solutions And Suggestions, Kristy J. Downing
Patent Eligibility's Doctrinal Exclusions... Lately, A Scary Movie Too Difficult To Watch: Concrete Solutions And Suggestions, Kristy J. Downing
Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review
Patent eligible subject matter is defined by the legislature’s 35 U.S.C. § 101 to include “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter.” Since the nineteenth century, however, United States (U.S.) courts have considered certain otherwise eligible subject matter excludable from patent protection. The judiciary’s doctrinal exclusions’ purpose was to protect fundamental building blocks to science and useful arts ensuring that such information could not be monopolized by one entity. Presently, however, the judicial exclusions have been used to exclude fewer fundamental building blocks and more ordinary brick-and-mortar innovations after two U.S. supreme court decisions (Mayo …
Copyright As Market Prospect, Shyamkrishna Balganesh
Copyright As Market Prospect, Shyamkrishna Balganesh
All Faculty Scholarship
For many decades now, copyright jurisprudence and scholarship have looked to the common law of torts—principally trespass and negligence—in order to understand copyright’s structure of entitlement and liability. This focus on property- and harm-based torts has altogether ignored an area of tort law with significant import for our understanding of copyright law: tortious interference with a prospective economic advantage. This Article develops an understanding of copyright law using tortious interference with a prospect as a homology. Tortious interference with a prospect allows a plaintiff to recover when a defendant's volitional actions interfere with a potential economic benefit that was likely …
Teva And The Process Of Claim Construction, Lee Petherbridge Ph.D., R. Polk Wagner
Teva And The Process Of Claim Construction, Lee Petherbridge Ph.D., R. Polk Wagner
All Faculty Scholarship
In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court addressed an oft-discussed jurisprudential disconnect between itself and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: whether patent claim construction was “legal” or “factual” in nature, and how much deference is due to district court decisionmaking in this area. In this Article, we closely examine the Teva opinion and situate it within modern claim construction jurisprudence. Our thesis is that the Teva holding is likely to have only very modest effects on the incidence of deference to district court claim construction but that for unexpected reasons the …