Law Commons^™

The Written Description Gap, Timothy R. Holbrook

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

Within patent law, there are two primary mechanisms that attempt to afford the appropriate balance between patent owners and subsequent inventors. First are the disclosure doctrines: a patent applicant cannot claim more than what she has actually disclosed in the patent application. A claim that is overly broad because it lacks adequate support in the patent specification is invalid. There is a clear link between the extent of the patent disclosure and the permissible scope of the claims contained therein. The second constraint on a patentee’s ability to obtain claim scope is the prior art. A claimed invention must be …

Patent Law's Disclosure Requirement, Jason Rantanen

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The requirement that recipients of patents disclose information about their inventions is a fundamental attribute of patent systems. Yet, despite being a core element of patent law, the disclosure requirement is rarely thought of in those terms; rather, it is conventionally approached by first dissecting it in two ways: in terms of its doctrinal mechanisms (primarily enablement and written description) and in terms of its theoretical basis. While this dissection can be useful in understanding issues within the disclosure requirement, the resulting compartmentalization also imposes limits on this approach.

This Essay approaches patent law’s disclosure requirement from a more holistic …

Patent Variation: Discerning Diversity Among Patent Functions, Jessica Silbey

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

This Article describes and analyzes qualitative interview data collected over a five-year period. The goal of the interviews was to explore the roles of intellectual property (“IP”) in IP rich fields. Interviews were with diverse actors in a wide-range of industries: film, book publishing, visual arts, internet commerce, biology, engineering, chemistry, computer science. The data described and analyzed in this Article focuses on the specific question about the diverse functioning of patents in the subset of interviewees who are scientists and engineers, their lawyers and business partners. The Article proceeds in two parts. Part I describes the empirical dimension of …

Patent Law Revisionism At The Supreme Court?, Ted Sichelman

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

The Supreme Court generally may overrule, revise, or disregard its precedent. However, the Court lacks such discretion when Congress codifies prior judicial precedent. Yet, the Court has repeatedly subverted Congress’s codification of scienter standards for indirect patent infringement. This Essay describes in detail the Court’s bungled—essentially revisionist—interpretations of its precedent in Aro Mfg. Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co. in 1964 and in Global-Tech v. SEB in 2011. Indeed, this Essay suggests that the Court in Global-Tech engaged in intentional obfuscation, very likely via a law clerk and unbeknownst the Justices. In the very least, the Justices abdicated their responsibility …

The Patent Litigation Explosion, James Bessen, Michael J. Meurer

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

This Article provides the first look at patent litigation hazards for public firms during the 1980s and 1990s. Litigation is more likely when prospective plaintiffs acquire more patents, when firms are larger and technologically close and when prospective defendants spend more on research and development (“R&D”). The latter suggests inadvertent infringement may be more important than piracy. Public firms face dramatically increased hazards of litigation as plaintiffs and even more rapidly increasing hazards as defendants, especially for small public firms. The increase cannot be explained by patenting rates, R&D, firm value or industry composition. Legal changes are the most likely …

Patent Law Is, At Best, Not Worth Keeping, Richard Stallman

Loyola University Chicago Law Journal

No abstract provided.