Law Commons^™

Gene Patents, Drug Prices, And Scientific Research: Unexpected Effects Of Recently Proposed Patent Eligibility Legislation, Charles Duan

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Recently, Congress has considered legislation to amend § 101, a section of the Patent Act that the Supreme Court has held to prohibit patenting of laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas. This draft legislation would expand the realm of patent-eligible subject matter, overturning the Court’s precedents along the way. The draft legislation, and movement to change this doctrine of patent law, made substantial headway with a subcommittee of the Senate holding numerous roundtables and hearings on the subject.

This article considers some less-discussed consequences of that draft leg- islative proposal. The legislation likely opens the door to patenting …

Confusion, Conflict, And Case Law: Analyzing The Language Of The United States Patent Act And Conflicting Case Law Regarding The Transfer Of Patent Rights In The 21st Century, Lucas C. Logic

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Mystery Of Section 253(B), Matthew Gagnier

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

In 2014, Elon Musk, the renowned and socially-minded CEO of Tesla Motors, Inc., posted a blog on Tesla’s website that stated the company would be freeing up many of its patents involved in the creation of the company’s electric cars to any interested party. Yet again, Musk astounded the public by choosing the betterment of society over corporate profits—stirring up a more positive image than any other corporate personality. But there are numerous questions that Musk’s positive PR have drowned out: Where can you access the patents?; How did freeing up the patents get past the other executive officers and …

Private Or Public Right? Who Should Adjudicate Patentability Disputes And Is The Current Scheme Really Constitutional?, Jasmyne M. Baynard

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

“The patent bargain is the foundation upon which the patent system is built: in exchange for protections for an invention, the inventor agrees to make public their inventions so that others may build upon it.” The patent bargain creates a presumption of protection for the inventors, yet categorizing the patent a public right or a private right has diminished expectations for inventors and confusion for the masses. On October 11, 2016, the Supreme Court denied two petitions for writ of certiorari that challenged the constitutionality of Patent Trial and Review Board proceedings on the basis of the patent owner’s Seventh …

An Uncomfortable Fit?: Intellectual Property Policy And The Administrative State, Kali Murray, Sapna Kumar, Jason Mazzone, Hannibal Travis

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

The Southeastern Association of Law Schools (SEALS) panel responds to the considerable scholarship on the increasing integration of administrative law into intellectual property policy. The discussion was conducted August 4, 2009, as part of SEALS' day-long Intellectual Property Workshop in West Palm Beach, Florida. Kali Murray moderated the panel, which included Sapna Kumar, Jason Mazzone, Hannibal Travis, and Jasmine Abdel-khalik.

Divergent Evolution Of The Patent Power And The Copyright Power, Edward C. Walterscheid

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Patent and copyright law in the United States derives from a constitutional grant of power to Congress, which drafted the Patent and Copyright Acts. The U.S. Supreme Court has addressed the meaning of various terms in the Patent and Copyright Clause, but only addressed the constitutionality of a copyright statute in 2003. The Court has never considered the constitutionality of a patent statute. The purpose of this article is to explore Congress' and the courts' diverging interpretations of the patent and copyright powers. It explores the reasons for this divergence, tracing the historic kinship between the two powers from the …

A Higher Nonobviousness Standard For Gene Patents: Protecting Biomedical Research From The Big Chill, Sara Dastgheib-Vinarov

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

In In re Deuel, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in favor of a patent applicant and found that DNA molecules encoding a protein were nonobvious under section 103 of the Patent Act. Since then, companies specializing in genomic research have filed numerous DNA sequence applications, instigating a troubling trend of patent filings within the biotechnology field. Currently these companies are stockpiling partial DNA sequence patents which have no known function. This Comment presents scientific, political, religious, and ethical justifications for heightening the nonobviousness standard for gene-related patents under section 103 of the Patent Act. …

The Doctrine Of Equivalents Into The Year 2000: The Line Is Becoming Brighter For Some But Remains Dim For Others, William T. Kryger

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

Under the holding of Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton-Davis Chemical Co., a court will not limit an inventor to the sole remedy of literal infringement. The inventor may also rely on the "doctrine of equivalents," which permits finding of infringement if there is equivalence between the elements of the accused product and the claimed elements of the patented invention. With this backdrop, Mr. Kryger analyzes the courts' struggle in developing a bright-line rule to protect patentees from piracy and fraud on their patents. Mr. Kryger first chronicles the evolution of the doctrine of equivalents through caselaw, particularly Graver Tank v. Linde …

Do Your Means Claims Mean What You Meant?, Jeffery N. Costakos, Walter E. Zimmerman

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

The authors review recent decisions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concerning "means claims" in order to provide practical guidelines and reduce the confusion surrounding 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6.