Law Commons^™

Useless Information: Genetic Patenting, The Usefulness Requirement, And The Effect On The “Big Freeze”, David T. Bennett

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This note considers the current state of affairs regarding patentability in the field of biotechnology, especially that of genes and DNA. Part II gives a brief background of patents in general, including the requirements that must be met for a patent to be granted, the way in which the patent process works, and the options available to a patent holder once a patent has been granted. Part III explores the history of biotechnology patents. Part IV takes a look at the relationship between patents and biotechnology, and sheds light on some of the common arguments both in favor of and …

Obviousness As Fact: The Issue Of Obviousness In Patent Law Should Be A Question Of Fact Reviewed With Appropriate Deference, Ted L. Field

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

One of the most common defenses that an accused infringer raises in a patent infringement lawsuit is that the patent claims at issue are invalid for obviousness. The question of obviousness is based on several factual determinations, and the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should sensibly review these determinations with deference to the jury’s or trial court’s findings. But these courts instead treat the ultimate determination of obviousness as a question of law to be reviewed de novo. This Article challenges the correctness of this standard of review and argues that courts …

The Riddle Of The Mysterious Patent Dance Wrapped In An Enigma: Is The Patent Dance Of The Bpcia Optional Or Mandatory?, Dov Hirsch

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

Recently, the nature of one of the aspects of the Biosimilar, Price, Competition, and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”) has been called into question: Is the “patent dance,” the structured patent dispute resolution process of the BPCIA, mandatory or optional? A mandatory patent dance requires a biosimilar applicant to comply with all its requirements, while an optional patent dance allows the biosimilar applicant to opt out of the entire dance if it so chooses. This question is important because it has the potential to affect that delicate balance of the BPCIA. This Note focuses on some of the consequential implications …

The Trademark As A Novel Innovation Index, Brian J. Focarino

The Journal of Business, Entrepreneurship & the Law

When studying the relationship that exists between entrepreneurship and intellectual property, patents receive the most scholarly attention. The attention makes sense when we consider that patents are closely associated with technical progress, grant temporary monopolies that incentivize investment in research & development (R&D), and function as vectors of technological dissemination in and of themselves. In a number of industries however, conventional forms of innovation often associated with patenting are minimal or missing altogether, and require us to look elsewhere to discern innovative behavior. This Essay highlights novel applications for trademark law to entrepreneurial activity in low-technology industries and low-financing locations …

Alice's Adventures In Oz: Revealing The Man Behind The Curtain, David Swetnam-Burland, Stacy O. Stitham

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

According to the Supreme Court's contrariwise thinking, in the world of Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Internation, Section 101 can and should be used early in litigation to distinguish a genuine, patentable invention from a sham-that is, to expose to scrutiny the idea behind the curtain.

Alice In Wonderland V. Cls Bank: The Supreme Court's Fantastic Adventure Into Section 101 Abstract Idea Jurisprudence, Annal D. Vyas

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This Article proposes a solution to the current problems surrounding section 101 and patent-eligibility. Specifically, it advocates for an amendment to section 101 of the Patent Act that eliminates the abstract idea exception when conducting a patent eligibility analysis. This approach has several advantages, including the fact that judges no longer need to provide logically contortioned explanations as to why one idea is "abstract" and another is not. Nor will judges have to decide whether an abstract idea can still be patent eligible by virtue of being an "inventive concept of an abstract idea."

Part II of this Article reviews …

Food Patents: The Unintended Consequences, Jay Dratler Jr.

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This short paper explores the unintended consequences of this strong economic incentive. The underlying assumptions of patent law and its economic incentive are that innovation is good, and newer is better. But is that always so? Science and history suggest maybe not, for some very fundamental reasons. And there are reasons to believe that the risks of unintended consequences of innovation in food may be more hazardous than those in other fields of innovation.

Patent Trolls And The Path To Reform, Eric J. Abram

Brigham Young University Prelaw Review

No abstract provided.

Expanding The Reissue Procedure: A Better Way To Do Business, Allan G. Altera

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Resolving Priority Disputes In Intellectual Property Collateral, Paul Heald

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Experiences Of Trips-Compliant Patent Law Reforms In Brazil, India, And South Africa And Lessons For Bangladesh, M. Monirul Azam

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This study analyzes the policy options used by Brazil, India, and South Africa in their transitions to a TRIPS-compliant patent law and their introduction of pharmaceutical patents. This comparative review can be used to explore possible policy options that can also be utilized by LDCs, including Bangladesh.

To Promote The Progress Of Science And Useful Arts: The Background And Origin Of The Intellectual Property Clause Of The United States Constitution, Edward C. Walterscheid

Journal of Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

The Technological Edge, Elizabeth I. Winston

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Protecting the bargain inherent in the patent system is central to the determination of patentable subject matter. If an applicant invents something novel, non-obvious, and useful and provides a written description that enables others to practice the invention, then the applicant is rewarded with the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, or offering to sell for a limited time the invention. The Patent Act provides an incentive to invest in innovation leading to new inventions and "reflects a balance between the need to encourage innovation and the avoidance of monopolies which stifle competition without any concomitant advance in …

Smoke And Mirrors: America Invents Act 2011: A Chill In The Air, Robert I. Reis

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

The primary focus of this article is on but a few of the distinct representations reflected in the provisions of the Act and their implications as America Invents is phased in over the next eighteen months. These first three changes address (1) the backlog in the Patent Office by hiring additional examiners, (2) the elimination of the best mode requirement as a defense in an infringement action, (3) the expanding adjudicatory role of the Patent Office in supplemental reviews, derivation proceedings, intra partes review or a post-grant review relative to constitutional due process and separation of powers questions, and (4) …

America Invents The Supplemental Examination, But Retains The Duty Of Candor: Questions And Implications, Lisa A. Dolak

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This paper considers these duty-of-candor-related issues-issues that the USPTO, the courts, patent owners, and patent challengers may face in the wake of the enactment of the AIA's provisions relating to supplemental examination, But first, by way of background, Part II presents an overview of the legislation relating to supplemental examination and explores how supplemental examination might operate, in light of its apparent goals. Part III considers questions relating to the overlay of supplemental examination on the existing U.S. patent application and enforcement regime, with particular focus on its interplay with the applicant's duty of candor. As that section illustrates, the …

Patent Attorney Malpractice: Case-Within-A-Case-Within-A-Case, A. Samuel Oddi

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This article will first provide a brief history of the jurisdictional controversy between federal courts and between federal courts and state courts. Then, the question will be examined of how the subject matter jurisdictional question has been resolved with respect to patent attorney malpractice cases to the extent it has been to date in the federal and state courts. The manner in which the case-within-a-case doctrine or methodology has been used in deciding the jurisdictional question will also be investigated. In addition, the relevance of the use of the judgment or non-judgment model to determine patent attorney malpractice will be …

Checks, Balance And Judicial Wizardry: Constitutional Delegation And Congressional Legislation, Robert I. Reis

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Recent Supreme Court activity regarding "intellectual property" may lead some to believe the increase in cases has some further meaning beyond the decisions themselves. The interests they represent and the source of power to enact legislation in the field raise distinct issues that may inform of current judicial interest and concern. These don't necessarily delineate the constitutional role of the Court relative to the delegation under Article I, Section Eight, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution. A gathering of cases using conventional search resources and techniques yielded 666 patent cases and 73 copyright cases. This essay is not intended …

Intersection Between The Patent System And Antitrust Laws: Patents Speeding, Antitrust Yielding, Innovation Bleeding!, Stijepko Tokic

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

In this article, I explain the interaction between the two laws and describe the ways in which these two extremely important areas of government regulation are and are not in tension. I argue that the conflict between the two laws is overstated, but the proper balance is far from being found. The reason for that is a notion that the current state of the patent system is more of a hindrance than a spur to innovation and competition due to overprotection and broadening of patent rights, lowering of standards to grant patents, chronic inefficiency of the Patent and Trademark Office …

An Introduction To U.S. Export Control: Regulations For Patent Practitioners, Michael K. Carrier

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This article presents basic information on the U.S. export control laws most relevant to U.S. patent practice, including the preparation and filing of patent applications related to commercial items, and the intended audience of this article is the U.S. patent practitioner who does not routinely deal with export-controlled subject matter. If the patent practitioner intends to: export technical information from the U.S. for the purpose of having a patent application prepared; hire or work with foreign nationals (who may or may not actually be in the U.S.) in conducting technical research or patentability and invalidity searches; or help prepare patent …

How (Not) To Discourage The Unscrupulous Copyist, Peter Ludwig

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This article explores how the U.S. and Japanese courts implement the doctrine of equivalents when determining patent infringement. The doctrine of equivalents is a balance of, on one hand, the public's interest to know the metes and bounds of the patent, and on the other hand, the private interest of the patentee to be granted a sufficient scope for the granted patent. After comparing and contrasting the implementation of the doctrine in Japan and the United States, I propose a new method that places the burden on the patent practitioner, before infringement proceedings begin, to determine the proper scope of …

Construing Patent Claims In Light Of The Specification Versus Importing Claim Limitations From The Specification: Is There Any Difference?, Rob Harmer

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This Comment proceeds in three parts. Part II discusses the purpose of claim construction and the components of a patent application most relevant to construing patent claims. This Part also discusses the standard of appellate review for claim construction, the sources of evidence used in construing patent claims, and the two conflicting claim construction canons. Part III highlights the conflict between the canons of avoiding importing claim limitations from the specification and construing patent claims in light of the specification. Again, when construing patent claims in light of intrinsic evidence, courts often inherently import limitations from the same intrinsic evidence. …

Fashion Design Protection: The Eternal Plight Of The "Soft Sculpture", Kimberly A. Harchuck

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This writing begs to answer the ninety-year-old question of whether or not fashion designs should be protected by law. In answering this question, Section II explores design protection in the United States and the actions taken for almost a full century in determining the legal protection of fashion. Section III discusses the many facets of fashion design, as information technology and art. Section IV reviews the evolution of copying, its benefits and detriments, and the theories proposing protection against copies. Section V addresses current U.S. intellectual property laws affecting fashion as well as the protections of individual European countries and …

Permissible Product Hopping: Why A Per Se Legal Rule Barring Antitrust Liability Is Necessary To Protect Future Innovation In The Pharmaceutical Industry, Michelle L. Ethier

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

Pharmaceutical product hopping is a relatively new phenomenon in which a brand-name pharmaceutical company tactically reformulates a drug and patents the reformulation in an attempt to avoid competition by a generic competitor. When viewed in the context of the HatchWaxman framework, product hopping can effectively eliminate generic competitors from the market, thereby implicating § 2 of the Sherman Act. In addressing antitrust liability, this Note advocates a per se legal approach to product hopping so long as the hop is supported by a valid patent. Although some have argued that deference to the United States Patent and Trademark Office and …

Examining Distinctive Jurisprudence In The Federal Circuit: Consequences Of A Specialized Court, Alan B. Parker

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

After reviewing jurisprudence that is consistent with the predicted behavior of specialized courts, this paper will discuss some recent Supreme Court cases which address some of the Circuit's distinctive jurisprudence. In addition to examining evidence of characteristics consistent with specialization-caused effects, this paper will highlight several examples suggesting that the perception is growing at the Supreme Court that the Circuit is behaving as a specialized court developing distinctive jargon and rules, and unduly tending to its constituency. That perception may or may not be justified, but there are signs that the CAFC is responding to the perception in its early …

Interlocutory Claim Construction Appeals: A Better Legislative Solution, Harold C. Wegner

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This paper commences with a consideration of current reform legislation that is a reaction to Cybor Corp. v. FAS Techs., Inc. and a high claim construction reversal rate. The problem may be traced to the notorious Federal Circuit opinion in Cybor. A surprisingly widely supported proposal for interlocutory claim construction appeals that had been pushed in the 110th Congress has been reformulated in a new version now pending in the Senate.

Ebay Rx, Tracy A. Thomas

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

From a remedial perspective, the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. reopened the age-old question of what it means to award equitable relief. In eBay, the Court rejected a permanent injunction issued by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to protect a business-method patent that defendant eBay had infringed on its successful auction website. This essay diagnoses the remedial problem in eBay as the improper use of presumptions for equitable relief that effectively prioritizes selected legal rights. It offers a prescriptive cure for the problem in the traditional balancing of the …

Rights And Remedies Post Ebay V. Mercexchange - Deep Waters Stirred, Robert I. Reis

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

eBay confirms the adage that good things often come in small packages. The court concisely focused on the inherent requirements of discretionary equitable relief in the use of injunctive remedies. The opinion informed that categorical presumptions based on presumed incidents of property rights did not satisfy the requirements of appropriate discretionary consideration. The four prongs of the requisite test "restated" for issuance of an injunction imposed the burden of proof on the plaintiff and all four factors which follow be deliberated by the court: (1) a finding of irreparable injury, (2) a finding of inadequate remedy at law for compensation, …

The Effects Of Ebay: Discretion, Statutory Damages, And Private Attorneys-General, Liam O'Melinn

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

If it were not already an apt time to consider the effects of the Supreme Court's eBay v. MercExchange decision, several recent developments serve as reminders of the importance of the issues addressed in the case: In Capitol v. Thomas the recording industry has succeeded in securing a $222,000 judgment in statutory damages for copyright infringement, a software patent infringement suit was filed in October 2007 by IP Innovation and Licensing against Novell and Redhat-seemingly the first suit to target Linux-and the PTO has rejected most of the claims in Amazon's 1-Click patent.

The eBay decision appears to assert that …

Constructed And Enhanced Equities Under Ebay: Whose Right Is It Anyway?, Richard S. Gruner

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

This article treats the injunction issuance standards announced in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, LLC, as the starting point for patent enforcement planning by sophisticated clients and their patent and corporate attorneys. The eBay standards imply a set of circumstances in which a patent holder will be well-positioned to obtain a patent enforcement injunction, circumstances that patent holders may be able to reach through well-crafted strategic moves. This article explores the actions that a pure licensee patent holder can take to improve its position and establish "constructed equities" that will enhance its chances of obtaining a patent enforcement injunction.

Truth In Intellectual Property Revisited: Embracing Ebay At The Edge, Thomas C. Folsom

Akron Intellectual Property Journal

In addition to whatever else it might do to serve the public interest, intellectual property diminishes the commons. To that extent, any particular intellectual property claim intersects the public interest and affects more than just the immediate parties. Not only does intellectual property diminish the commons, but also each of its disciplines contains an almost casually incoherent metaphysic. There is incoherence, if not at the core, at least at the critical edges of intellectual property law that is systemic and fundamental. Notwithstanding over 200 years of practice in the United States, the goal of establishing a sufficiently principled, practical and …