Law Commons^™

Patent Citation Analysis And Patent Damages, Dr. Peter A. Malaspina

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

The Fatal Attraction Of Pay-For-Delay, Robin C. Feldman, Prianka Misra

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Using A Phillips Construction In All Ptab Trials: The Impact On District Court Patent Actions And Ptab Proceedings, Sarah Jelsema, Andrew Mason, John Vandenberg

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Petitioner Estoppel From Patent Trial And Appeal Board Proceedings After Sas Institute Inc. V. Iancu, Jennifer Esch, Paula Miller, Stacy Lewis, Tom Irving

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Administrative Oversight: Justice Gorsuch’S Patent Opinions, The Ptab, And Antagonism Toward The Administrative State, Daniel D. Kim, Jonathan Stroud

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

In his first term, Justice Neil Gorsuch has made a surprisingly forceful impact on, of all things, patent law—and even more unlikely, the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s adjudicatory arm, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Was there any way to predict, from his 10th Circuit opinions below, that he would author opinions in all three patent cases in his first term? Was this attention the result of deeply submerged but long-felt opinions on patent law, or rather a result of his sharp distrust of administrative overreach? We analyze 10th Circuit and Supreme Court opinions authored by Justice Gorsuch, …

Due Process In Aia Proceedings After Sas Institute Inc. V. Iancu, Mikaela Stone, Britton Davis

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

The Collapse Of Covered Business Method Reviews, Eleanor M. Yost

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Table Of Contents, Chicago-Kent Law Review

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

"Good Reason" Laws Under The Gun: May-Issue States And The Right To Bear Arms, Jack M. Amaro

Chicago-Kent Law Review

This note proposes a framework for analyzing the point at which discretionary restrictions on the concealed carry of firearms are unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, which, at its core, guarantees the responsible, law-abiding citizen at least the right to use a firearm for self-defense. Although the Supreme Court has yet to affirmatively answer whether and to what extent this right extends beyond the home, every state allows its residents to publicly carry a firearm in some form—be it open or concealed. But states have the power to limit who may exercise this right; and some states curtail it to the …

The "Art" Of Future Life: Rethinking Personal Injury Law For The Negligent Deprivation Of A Patient's Right To Procreation In The Age Of Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Erika N. Auger

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

President Trump's Big Beautiful Wall: Discrimination, Eminent Domain, And The Public Use Requirement, Meghan K. Tierney

Chicago-Kent Law Review

At a press conference held in Trump Tower New York City on June 16, 2015, Donald Trump announced his candidacy for President of the United States by promising to expand the border wall along the Southern United States. President Trump has insisted that his only reasons behind completely separating the United States from Mexico are to curtail illegal immigration and curb drug cartel activity, but many argue that his statements indicate a much more sinister motive based in racial discrimination. The public use requirement of the Fifth Amendment Takings Clause allows the federal government to take private land for the …

Consequences For Patent Owners If A Patent Is Unconstitutionally Invalidated By The Patent Trial And Appeal Board, Mark Magas

Chicago-Kent Law Review

There have been many constitutional challenges against the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) since it was created by the America Invents Act in 2011. While the merits of these challenges have been widely debated, there has been little analysis of what would happen if one of these challenges succeeded and patents are found to have been unconstitutionally invalidated. This note examines how issues with waiver, retroactivity, and finality may prevent patent owners from getting their patent rights back, considering the type of constitutional challenge and the different stages of the PTAB process. While the odds are stacked against patent …

Enhanced Patent Infringement Damages Post-Halo And The Problem With Using The Read Factors, Betul Serbest

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The United States Patent Act allows a patent holder to recover treble damages for “willful infringement.” The standard for willful infringement has changed over the years, with the United States Supreme Court providing the most recent explanation of what is “willful” in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. in 2016. Courts, however, continue to use a set of factors set forth in Read Corp. v. Portec, Inc. in 1992 to aid their discretion in awarding willful infringement enhanced damages. In this article, I argue that at least two of the Read factors are inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s Halo …

Clarifying The Scope Of The Self-Incrimination Clause: City Of Hays V. Vogt, Samantha Ruben

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Three months after oral arguments, the Supreme Court dismissed the writ of certiorari in City of Hays v. Vogt as improvidently granted. The question in Vogt was whether the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination is violated when incriminating statements are used at a probable cause hearing, as opposed to a criminal trial. As a result of the “DIG,” the Court left a circuit split unresolved surrounding the meaning of a “criminal case” within the Fifth Amendment’s Self-Incrimination Clause.

This note argues that the Supreme Court should not have dismissed Vogt and should have decided that the Fifth Amendment right against …

The Metastasization Of Mandatory Arbitration, Alexander J.S. Colvin

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Mandatory arbitration procedures have expanded to become a common feature of American employment relations. This article presents the results of a new original survey examining the extent of mandatory arbitration, where it is most commonly used, and which employees it is most likely to affect. Overall, 53.9 percent of private sector business establishments, representing 56.2 percent of nonunion employees, have mandatory arbitration procedures. Larger employers are more likely to have adopted mandatory arbitration, as are workplaces with lower paid employees. Mandatory arbitration is particularly common in California, North Carolina, and Texas, but is widespread nationwide. Class action waivers are included …

Path To Destruction: Cook County's Property Tax System Is A Cause For Concern As It Mimics The Defunct Taxing Procedures That Led To The Detroit Foreclosure Crisis, Robert Romano

Chicago-Kent Law Review

For decades, Cook County, Illinois, has had one of the highest property tax rates in the country, and as a result the County has begun to experience unprecedented foreclosure rates which has contributed, in part, to the State’s significant population decline. Residents are forced to endure a property tax system that disproportionately burdens low-income homeowners, while providing tax breaks to higher-income individuals and commercial owners. The primary causes and characteristics of Cook County’s defunct property tax system are strikingly similar to those that sent the City of Detroit spiraling into bankruptcy in 2013.

This note provides a comparative analysis of …

Is Dna Really A Natural Product? It's Time To Separate Fact From (Legal) Fiction: An Examination Of Dna Patentability As A Biological Algorithm In The Post-Myriad Era, Nicholas Ulen

Chicago-Kent Law Review

In 2013, the United States Supreme Court delivered its landmark decision in Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., holding isolated DNA unpatentable, thereby invalidating the claims of thousands of DNA patents in the process. The opinion, delivered by Justice Thomas, reasoned that the act of separating DNA from the body did not sufficiently transform the molecule beyond what naturally exists. Yet the Court found that line to be crossed when it held certain artificially synthesized complementary DNA molecules coding for the exact same gene patentable. Unlike the Federal Circuit, the Court focused its analysis not on the …

All Or Nothing: Why The Supreme Court Sas Mandate Does Not Eliminate The Shaw Safe Harbor, Matt Johnson, Michael Lavine, Daniel Kazhdan Ph.D, Lisa Furby, David Anderson

Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Chicago-Kent Magazine - 2019, Iit Chicago-Kent College Of Law

Chicago-Kent Magazine

No abstract provided.

Age, Time, And Discrimination (Forthcoming), Alexander Boni-Saenz

All Faculty Scholarship

Discrimination scholars have traditionally justified antidiscrimination laws by appealing to the value of equality. Egalitarian theories locate the moral wrong of discrimination in the unfavorable treatment one individual receives as compared to another. However, discrimination theory has neglected to engage seriously with the socio-legal category of age, which poses a challenge to this egalitarian consensus due to its unique temporal character. Unlike other identity categories, an individual’s age inevitably changes over time. Consequently, any age-based legal rule or private discrimination will ultimately yield equal treatment over the lifecourse. This explains the weak constitutional protection for age and the fact that …

Vol. 36, No. 1, Amanda R. Clark, Susan M. Matta

The Illinois Public Employee Relations Report

Janus: Otherwise Known As The Death Of Stare Decisis, But Only As It Relates To Unions, by Amanda R. Clark and Susan M. Matta

Recent Developments

Haack On Legal Proof, Richard Wright

All Faculty Scholarship

In this paper I discuss Susan Haack’s illuminating discussion and constructive critique of the current confusion regarding the standards of proof employed in the law, focusing especially on mathematical probability rather than warranted belief interpretations of those standards. At the end, I question Haack’s claim that statistical evidence is relevant not only for establishing the existence of a causal process but also, although usually insufficient by itself, for proving actual causation in a specific case.

The Cost Of Obeying The Law?: The Seventh Circuit Rejects The Bona Fide Error Defense From A Debt Collector Who Followed The Then-Binding Law, Jun Qiu

Seventh Circuit Review

It is expected that people should follow the law, which includes the statutes themselves and the judicial rulings interpreting those statutes. However, if the binding judicial interpretation changes, should the parties be liable for their behavior following the old binding judicial interpretation of a federal statute at the time when it was still in effect? Or, should there be any defense that would allow the parties to shield themselves from liability for a good-faith reliance on the old binding judicial interpretation?

Stranded At Sea: The Seventh Circuit And The Rule 11 “Safe Harbor” Rule, Daniel Ristau

Seventh Circuit Review

When lawyers pursue frivolous claims, they invite sanctions. Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires attorneys to certify that the pleadings and motions they submit are meritorious. Since 1993, attorneys have been required to serve opposing counsel with a motion—to fire a warning shot—when they intend to file for sanctions. This provides attorneys an opportunity to seek “safe harbor” and avoid sanctions by withdrawing or amending actions brought for an improper purpose.

Your Supervisor As Your Chattel: Broadening The Scope Of Negligent Hiring And Retention In Illinois, Philip F. Vieira

Seventh Circuit Review

In Illinois, employers have a duty to act reasonably in hiring and retaining their employees. An employer who negligently hires or retains an employee may be liable for injuries caused by that employee even if the employee is acting outside the scope of employment. Of course, this doctrine has to have some limit. Otherwise, employers would be responsible for practically any injury committed by one of its employees, even if it is only tangentially related to the fact of employment. However, courts have struggled to define that outer limit. Particularly when faced with horrific injuries, courts may be tempted to …

Mirror, Mirror On The Wall, Are They Trainees And Not Employees At All? The Legality And "Economic Reality" Of Unpaid Internships, Beatriz Carrillo

Seventh Circuit Review

The number of unpaid internships has skyrocketed over the past years as employers seem to prefer those with experience in the field. “Experience” has become the currency that college students seek to open the door to future employment. Unpaid interns have become the modern-day equivalent of entry-level employees. However, they are not paid for the hours worked and lack the normal employment protections offered to employees, such as FLSA and Title VII protections. The court's interest recently has been sparked to define the roles of interns in the labor force and has started to shape intern’s legal protections. As a …

The “Animus” Briefs: Attacks On The Seventh Circuit’S Sound Analysis Of Transgender Bathroom Rights In Public Schools, Brennan B. Hutson

Seventh Circuit Review

You have probably heard about state legislatures floating the idea of “bathroom laws” that would prohibit transgendered individuals from using the bathroom of their gender identity in public places. Although no state has actually signed such legislation into law, the spirit of those anti-transgender laws has been carried out in smaller governmental entities: public schools. Unlike a hypothetical state law, which would be nearly impossible to enforce without state officials performing inspections of genitals, a school policy is truly enforceable and has real effects.

Outgrowing Its Usefulness: Seventh Circuit Limits The Application Of The Common Actor Inference In Title Vii Discrimination Cases, Michael G. Zolfo

Seventh Circuit Review

Can a person harbor discriminatory views toward protected minority groups, yet still hire a member of that group as an employee? Under Title VII jurisprudence, the “common actor inference” holds that if the same supervisor hires and fires an employee in a short time period, that supervisor likely did not have a discriminatory reason for the employment decision. The common actor inference has been accepted and used across all U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, but was recently criticized and limited by the Seventh Circuit.

Baby Got (A Broken) Back, But No Remedy: The Seventh Circuit’S Refusal To Provide A Remedy For Eighth Amendment Violations, Timothy Lavino

Seventh Circuit Review

Since 1871, individuals have been able to bring a cause of action against state officials who violate the individual’s constitutional rights. However, it wasn’t until the 1965 case Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics that the U.S. Supreme Court created a cause of action for individuals whose Fourth Amendment rights were violated by federal officials. Since 1965, this cause of action, known as a Bivens action, has been extended to violations of the Fifth and Eighth Amendments.

Neither Cruel Nor Unusual: An Hour And A Half Delay In Treatment Can Now Amount To Deliberate Indifference, Monica J. Raven

Seventh Circuit Review

The Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution proscribes cruel and unusual punishment. To state a cognizable claim, a plaintiff must allege that a prison official or medical professional was deliberately indifferent to his or her objectively serious medical need. In Lewis v. McLean, the Seventh Circuit analyzed whether a nurse and prison official’s hour and a half delay in treatment created a triable issue as to whether they acted with deliberate indifference. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants showed deliberate indifference to his severe back pain by delaying his access to medical care. The defendants, on the other hand, …