Law Commons^™

The "On-Sale" Bar To Patentability: Actual Reduction To Practice Not Required In Pfaff V. Wells Electronics, Inc., Daniel J. Whitman

Akron Law Review

A patent grants to an inventor the exclusive right to prevent others from making, using, or selling his invention throughout the United States. However, an inventor is statutorily barred from receiving a patent for an invention that was “on sale” prior to one year before his U.S. filing date. An offer to sell cannot bar patentability until an invention exists. The general issue in applying the “on sale” bar is “[a]t what point is the invention sufficiently developed such that, coupled with an offer to sell, the inventor’s commercial activities invoke the on sale bar?” The United States Supreme Court’s …

Festo Corp. V. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.: A Fog Between The Bars, Mark R. Hull

Akron Law Review

This Note examines the interplay between the judicially-created patent law rules of prosecution history estoppel and the doctrine of equivalents. Part II explores the development of these rules as well as their effects and underlying goals. Part II also discusses landmark Supreme Court decisions regarding the doctrine of equivalents and prosecution history estoppel and how the Federal Circuit has applied these rules. Part III discusses the United States Supreme Court decision in Festo Corporation v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co.

Finally, Part IV analyzes the Festo decision, explains that the decision will likely increase the cost and complexity of patent …

The Disclosure Requirements Of The 1952 Patent Act: Looking Back And A New Statute For The Next Fifty Years, Harold C. Wegner

Akron Law Review

The 1952 Patent Act was a major event in terms of cutting and pasting together the various patent laws from the previous eighty or so years into the first patent law codification of the twentieth century. The great bulk was a mere codification of principles, going back in some cases to the earliest patent laws of the eighteenth century, that was the work of P. J. Federico.2 Of the three major changes made to the patent law in 1952, each was primarily the work of the late Giles Sutherland Rich,3 with his revision of Section 112 to introduce “means” claiming-perhaps …

Ebay V. Mercexchange: Traditional Four-Factor Test For Injunctive Relief Applies To Patent Cases, According To The Supreme Court, Sue Ann Mota

Akron Law Review

This article will examine the eBay litigation and landmark Supreme Court decision and its important impact. This decision may temporarily forestall patent reform by removing the threat of near-mandatory injunctive relief if patent infringement and validity is found and will let the court weigh the factors when deciding patent injunctive relief.

Protection Of Computers And Computer Software Before The United States International Trade Commission: In Re Certain Personal Computers And Components Thereof, Nicholas N. Leach

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.