Law Commons^™

Layered Patent System, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Forward To The Past, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

The Supreme Court’s decision in Bilski v. Kappos - banning all patents claiming ‘‘abstract ideas,’’ but refusing to categorically bar any particular type of patent - represents a return to the Court’s past patentable subject matter jurisprudence. In so returning, the Court determined that business methods could potentially be patentable. This Supreme Court Review article discusses what is essentially a restart: lower courts and the PTO must remake the law using the same precedent that led to the rigid rules rejected by the Court in Bilski. Part I discusses Mr. Bilski’s patent application and the Court’s ruling that it is …

Patent Challenges And Royalty Inflation, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Eliminating bad patents is supposed to be a good thing, and so federal law allows any interested party to challenge a patent's validity almost any time. But the law goes a step further than merely conferring broad challenge rights. It also makes them nearly impossible to contract away. Instead, federal law voids any agreement not to challenge a patent. While a contract ordinarily signifies a final resolution of all issues covered by its terms, no such peace exists in patent licensing. This inalienability of patent challenge rights comes at a cost, a cost borne by many patent licensees and their …

Reinventing Usefulness, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Patent law includes one of this country’s oldest continuous statutory requirements: since 1790, and without variance, inventors are only entitled to patent “new and useful” inventions. While “newness” receives constant attention and debate, usefulness has been largely ignored. Usefulness has transformed into the toothless and misunderstood “utility” doctrine, which requires that patents only have a bare minimum potential for use. This article seeks to reinvent patentable usefulness. It is the first comprehensive look at usefulness and it reasons that a core benefit of the requirement is to aid in the commercialization of inventions. The article then proposes two ways that …

A Brief Defense Of The Written Description Requirement, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

This essay provides a brief defense of the much maligned "written description" requirement in patent law. Many argue that there is no such requirement, and that a patent specification that enables a person having ordinary skill in the art (the PHOSITA) to make and use the invention is sufficient, even if the specification contains no description of the invention. This essay briefly describes the dispute, and then raises an important but under-theorized argument in favor of a separate written description requirement. The essay accepts the persuasive grammatical reading of the statute proposed by opponents of a separate written description requirement. …

Trade Secret Law And Information Development Incentives, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Trade secrets differ from other forms of intellectual property in many subtle ways that affect incentives to invest in information development. These differences relate not only to the types of information protected, but also to the requirements one must meet to protect that type of information. The various divergences and intersections of trade secret laws with other intellectual property laws lead to differences in the amount and types of investments companies make in developing information. This chapter explores five types of differential incentives associated with trade secret law: - Trade secret law v. no trade secret law - Trade secret …

Everything Is Patentable, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

The currently confused and inconsistent jurisprudence of patentable subject matter can be clarified by implementing a single rule - that which is otherwise patentable under the Patent Act is patentable subject matter. In other words, if a discovery otherwise meets the requirements of patentability - namely category, utility, novelty, non-obviousness, and specification - then the discovery will be properly patentable without need to consider traditional non-statutory subject matter issues such as mathematical algorithms, products of nature, or natural phenomena. The primary virtue of the proposed rule is that it provides a more rigorous and consistent doctrinal framework for determining patentability. …

The Failure Of Public Notice In Patent Prosecution, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Patents often contain technical information intertwined with legal meaning, and inventions are often difficult to describe in words. Despite complex interpretive rules, patent law has failed in one of its essential missions - giving those who need to read patents the ability to understand the scope of a patent's claims in a consistent and predictable manner. As a result, those who rely on patents - patentees, potential and actual licensees, potential and actual defendants, future patent applicants, courts, and even the Patent and Trademark Office - may find it difficult or impossible to discern the metes and bounds of any …

Why Do We Have Trade Secrets?, Michael Risch

Michael Risch

Trade secrets are arguably the most important and most litigated form of intellectual property, yet very little has been written that justifies their existence, perhaps because they differ so much from other forms of intellectual property. This article explores the history of trade secret law in the United States and examines why it is that every state has opted to protect secret information, even though such protection is antithetical to the policies of access associated with patent law and non-protection of 'facts' associated with copyright law. In this article, I examine four potential ways to justify trade secret law. First, …