Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

University of Michigan Law School

2007

Intellectual Property Law

Patent reform

Articles 1 - 7 of 7

Full-Text Articles in Law

Now That The Courts Have Beaten Congress To The Punch, Why Is Congress Still Punching The Patent System?, Robert A. Armitage Jan 2007

Now That The Courts Have Beaten Congress To The Punch, Why Is Congress Still Punching The Patent System?, Robert A. Armitage

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The U.S. House of Representatives began September by passing the Patent Reform Act of 2007. This bill, if enacted, would make major changes to U.S. patent law. Given the universally recognized need for improvements to the U.S. patent system, passing a patent reform bill in the House should have been easy. It was not. The Patent Reform Act of 2007 made it through the House only after a spirited debate. There were a host of complaints by House members that the bill was not ready for floor action. In the end, it passed the House by a relatively narrow margin, …


Making Sense Of Ksr And Other Recent Patent Cases, Harold C. Wegner Jan 2007

Making Sense Of Ksr And Other Recent Patent Cases, Harold C. Wegner

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The recent Supreme Court review of KSR International Inc. v. Teleflex Inc., eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC, and Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp. manifests the Court’s current interest in the patent jurisprudence of the Fed-eral Circuit. Now it is evident that the Court has a level of concern sufficient to guarantee the possibility of grant of certiorari—whereas formerly a case could rarely generate sufficient interest for review. For long-range impor-tance in patent law, KSR stands alone as the single most important Supreme Court patent decision on the bread and butter standard of “obviousness” in the more than forty years since …


Ksr's Effect On Patent Law, Stephen G. Kunin, Andrew K. Beverina Jan 2007

Ksr's Effect On Patent Law, Stephen G. Kunin, Andrew K. Beverina

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

The Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. clarified its 1966 decision in Graham v. John Deere, avoiding the sea change to a synergy- based standard that many had expected—and perhaps feared. KSR has raised the bar set in Graham for seeking patent protection—by providing a flexible test for obviousness—while simultaneously making it easier for accused infringers to defend themselves. Moreover, KSR will change the strategies of both patent prosecutors and litigators. Before KSR, the Supreme Court’s last major decision on nonobviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 was Graham, in which the Court established three factual inquiries for …


The Myth Of Inherent And Inevitable Industry Differences: Diversity As Artifact In The Quest For Patent Reforms, Robert A. Armitage Jan 2007

The Myth Of Inherent And Inevitable Industry Differences: Diversity As Artifact In The Quest For Patent Reforms, Robert A. Armitage

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The University of Michigan Law School hosted a two-day conference entitled "Patents and Diversity in Innovation." The morning of the first day featured a panel devoted to "industry differences." This panel took up the task of dealing with the following questions: How has diversification of innovation and the expansion of patentable subject matter affected patent practice? How do markets for technology vary from sector to sector? And how do they reflect or influence patent practice? To what extent are business practices and competitive markets shaped by the nature of the technology, product, or service?[...] A conference titled "Patents and Diversity" …


A Method For Reforming The Patent System, Peter S. Menell Jan 2007

A Method For Reforming The Patent System, Peter S. Menell

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The principal recent studies of patent reform (NAS (2004), FTC (2003), Jaffe and Lerner (2004)) contend that a uniform system of patent protection must (or should) be available for "anything under the sun made by man" based upon one or more of the following premises: (1) the Patent Act requires this breadth and uniformity of treatment; (2) "discriminating" against any particular field of "technology" would be undesirable; (3) discrimination among technologies would present insurmountable boundary problems and could easily be circumvented through clever patent drafting; and (4) interest group politics stand in the way of excluding any subject matter classes …


Compulsory Patent Licensing: Is It A Viable Solution In The United States, Carol M. Nielsen, Michael R. Samardzija Jan 2007

Compulsory Patent Licensing: Is It A Viable Solution In The United States, Carol M. Nielsen, Michael R. Samardzija

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

As technology continues to advance at a rapid pace, so do the number of patents that cover every aspect of making, using, and selling these innovations. In 1996, to compound the rapid change of technology, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that business methods are also patentable. Hence in the current environment, scores of patents, assigned to many different parties, may cover a single electronic device or software--making it increasingly impossible to manufacture an electronic device without receiving a cease and desist letter or other notice from a patentee demanding a large royalty or threatening an injunction. Companies, particularly those in …


Ksr V. Teleflex: Predictable Reform Of Patent Substance And Procedure In The Judiciary, John F. Duffy Jan 2007

Ksr V. Teleflex: Predictable Reform Of Patent Substance And Procedure In The Judiciary, John F. Duffy

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

Though KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. is now widely acknowl-edged in the bar and the academy to be the most significant patent case in at least a quarter century, that view dramatically underestimates the impor-tance of the decision. The KSR decision has immense significance not merely because it rejected the standard of patentability that had been applied in the lower courts for decades, but also because it highlights many separate trends that are reshaping the patent system. This Commentary will touch upon four such trends that are clearly evi-dent in KSR. First, the case was a predictable continuation of …