Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Publication
- File Type
Articles 1 - 15 of 15
Full-Text Articles in Law
Joinder Of Unrelated Infringers As Defendants In Patent Litigation Under The Jurisprudence Of The United States District Court For Eastern District Of Texas—A Critical Review, Ping-Hsun Chen
Ping-Hsun Chen
On September 16, 2011, the American patent system started a new era because of the enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”). 35 U.S.C. § 299 was enacted to limit district court’s power to permit joinder of unrelated infringers as defendants in a single lawsuit. Before that, district courts apply Rule 20 of the Federal Civil Procedure. The Eastern District of Texas had permitted joinder only because the same patent was infringed. By introducing § 299, Congress intended to abrogate such approach. Later, the Federal Circuit in In re EMC limited the practice of Rule 20 and required a …
American Innovation And The Limits Of Patent Law: A Response To William Hubbard, Competitive Patent Law, Christopher B. Seaman
American Innovation And The Limits Of Patent Law: A Response To William Hubbard, Competitive Patent Law, Christopher B. Seaman
Christopher B. Seaman
In his recent article Competitive Patent Law, Professor William Hubbard makes a valuable contribution regarding an underexplored aspect of patent law’s ability to encourage innovation — namely, “whether U.S. patent law can be tailored to provide U.S. innovators with enhanced incentives to invent” compared to foreign rivals, and thus by extension make American firms more competitive in the global marketplace. This brief response addresses three aspects of Professor Hubbard’s thoughtful and well-written article. First, it critiques the article’s contention that the United States is currently facing an “innovation gap.” Second, it critically evaluates the claim that patent law can play …
Standards Of Proof In Civil Litigation: An Experiment From Patent Law, David L. Schwartz, Christopher B. Seaman
Standards Of Proof In Civil Litigation: An Experiment From Patent Law, David L. Schwartz, Christopher B. Seaman
Christopher B. Seaman
Standards of proof are widely assumed to matter in litigation. They operate to allocate the risk of error between litigants, as well as to indicate the relative importance attached to the ultimate decision. But despite their perceived importance, there have been relatively few empirical studies testing jurors’ comprehension and application of standards of proof, particularly in civil litigation. Patent law recently presented an opportunity to assess the potential impact of varying the standard of proof in civil cases. In Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, the Supreme Court held that a patent’s presumption of validity can only be overcome by …
The Case Against Federalizing Trade Secrecy, Christopher B. Seaman
The Case Against Federalizing Trade Secrecy, Christopher B. Seaman
Christopher B. Seaman
Trade secrecy is unique among the major intellectual property (IP) doctrines because it is governed primarily by state law. Recently, however, a number of influential actors — including legislators, academics, and organizations representing IP attorneys and owners — have proposed creating a private civil cause of action for trade secret misappropriation under federal law. Proponents assert that federalizing trade secrecy would provide numerous benefits, including substantive uniformity, the availability of a federal forum for misappropriation litigation, and the creation of a unified national regime governing IP rights. This Article engages in the first systematic critique of the claim that federalizing …
From De Novo Review To Informal Deference: An Historical, Empirical, And Normative Analysis Of The Standard Of Appellate Review For Patent Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson, Peter Menell
From De Novo Review To Informal Deference: An Historical, Empirical, And Normative Analysis Of The Standard Of Appellate Review For Patent Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson, Peter Menell
Peter Menell
Patent scope plays a central role in the operation of the patent system, making patent claim construction a critical aspect of just about every patent litigation. With the resurgence of patent jury trials in the 1980s, the allocation of responsibility for interpreting patent claims between trial judge and jury emerged as a salient issue. While the Supreme Court’s Markman decision usefully removed claim construction from the black box of jury deliberations notwithstanding its "mongrel" mixed fact/law character, the Federal Circuit’s adherence to the view that claim construction is a pure question of law subject to de novo appellate review produced …
It’S The End Of The Biological Patent World As We Know It, And Consumer Watchdog Feels Fine: How Consumer Watchdog Is Attempting To Kill The Future Of Horticultural Research, George R. Holton
George R Holton
No abstract provided.
Not So Obvious After All: Patent Law's Nonobviousness Requirement, Ksr, And The Fear Of Hindsight Bias, Glynn S. Lunney Jr, Christian T. Johnson
Not So Obvious After All: Patent Law's Nonobviousness Requirement, Ksr, And The Fear Of Hindsight Bias, Glynn S. Lunney Jr, Christian T. Johnson
Glynn Lunney
Before the creation of the Federal Circuit in 1982, nonobviousness served as the primary gatekeeper for patents. When patent holders sued for infringement and lost, more than sixty percent of the time, they lost on the grounds that their patent was obvious. With the advent of the Federal Circuit, nonobviousness became a much less difficult hurdle to surmount. From 1982 until 2005, when patent holders sued for infringement and lost, obviousness was the reason in less than fifteen percent of the cases. While obviousness remained formally a requirement of patent protection, there can be little doubt that the Federal Circuit …
National Treatment, National Interest And The Public Domain, Margaret Ann Wilkinson
National Treatment, National Interest And The Public Domain, Margaret Ann Wilkinson
Margaret Ann Wilkinson
The concept of the "public domain" is a powerful rhetorical element in he policy debates involving intellectual property. But is it a stable and useful concept for analyzing information issues? Can the notion of the public domain and the concept of the information commons be separated? Is the notion of the public domain merely another way of expressing the public interest? This paper canvassed the literature, seeking a theoretically consistent definition for public domain that was equally applicable across the copyright, trademark and patent spheres. The analysis demonstrated that there is no such construct. The paper also reviews the findings …
Layered Patent System, Michael Risch
Layered Patent System, Michael Risch
Michael Risch
Do Patent Licensing Demands Mean Innovation?, Robin C. Feldman, Mark A. Lemley
Do Patent Licensing Demands Mean Innovation?, Robin C. Feldman, Mark A. Lemley
Robin C Feldman
Patentable Subject Matter As A Policy Lever, Amy L. Landers
Patentable Subject Matter As A Policy Lever, Amy L. Landers
Amy L. Landers
Patents are intended to be used as instruments to further policy. One potent policy driver to accomplish such goals is through the legal construction and application of the term “invention." Internationally, various legal authorities have recognized that this definition can be crafted in ways that are targeted to have real-world consequences. In the U.S., the open-ended framework of the Patent Act's section 101 invites judicial interpretation to effectuate the law's purposes. Ideally, these determinations should rest on articulated, transparent reasoning so that, under a common law system, those policies can serve as touchstones to ensure that the relevant precedents are …
The Anti-Patent: A Proposal For Startup Immunity, Amy L. Landers
The Anti-Patent: A Proposal For Startup Immunity, Amy L. Landers
Amy L. Landers
The controversy surrounding the current implementation of the patent system is well known. Some question whether the system has become entirely dysfunctional and disincentives innovation, particularly as the law operates within some industries. Moreover, early stage companies, particularly those just beginning to gain success, are particularly vulnerable targets for lawsuits. Notably, these same companies can be rich sources of important technological innovation.
Because the U.S. has always had a patent system, it is impossible to understand the intended and unintended consequences of eliminating this form of intellectual property protection even in a limited manner. As economist Fritz Machlup stated in …
Patenting Physibles: A Fresh Perspective For Claiming 3d-Printable Products, Daniel Harris Brean
Patenting Physibles: A Fresh Perspective For Claiming 3d-Printable Products, Daniel Harris Brean
Daniel Harris Brean
Ending Unreasonable Royalties: Why Nominal Damages Are Adequate To Compensate Patent Assertion Entities For Infringement, Daniel Harris Brean
Ending Unreasonable Royalties: Why Nominal Damages Are Adequate To Compensate Patent Assertion Entities For Infringement, Daniel Harris Brean
Daniel Harris Brean
Empirical Studies Of Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson
Empirical Studies Of Claim Construction, Jonas Anderson
J. Jonas Anderson