Law Commons^™

Tcl V. Ericsson: The First Major U.S. Top-Down Frand Royalty Decision, Jorge L. Contreras

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

On December 21, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California released its long awaited Memorandum of Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law in TCL Communications v. Ericsson. In a lengthy and carefully crafted decision, Judge James Selna sets forth some important new points regarding the calculation of fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) royalties for standardsessential patents (SEPs). Among other things, the decision offers a strong endorsement of “top down” methodologies for the calculation of SEP royalties, and makes significant use of the non-discrimination (ND) prong of the FRAND commitment in arriving at a FRAND royalty …

The Antitrusting Of Patentability, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

Deciding a patent’s validity is costly, and so is deciding it incorrectly. Judges and juries must expend significant resources in order to reach a patent validity determination that is properly informed by the relevant facts. At the same time, patent validity determinations reached quickly and cheaply may conserve resources today while creating future costs. Wrongly preserving an invalid patent can distort the competitive market and enable abuses, such as nuisance litigation. Meanwhile, wrongly striking down a valid patent can undermine incentives for continued investment and commercialization in knowledge assets. Courts facing patent validity issues have begun to strike this balance …

An Empirical Study Of University Patent Activity, Brian L. Frye, Christopher J. Ryan

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Since 1980, a series of legislative acts and judicial decisions have affected the ownership, scope, and duration of patents. These changes have coincided with historic increases in patent activity among academic institutions.

This article presents an empirical study of how changes to patent policy precipitated responses by academic institutions, using spline regression functions to model their patent activity. We find that academic institutions typically reduced patent activity immediately before changes to the patent system, and increased patent activity immediately afterward. This is especially true among research universities. In other words, academic institutions responded to patent incentives in a strategic manner, …

The Anti-Suit Injunction - A Transnational Remedy For Multi-Jurisdictional Sep Litigation, Jorge L. Contreras, Michael A. Eixenberger

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Litigation concerning standards-essential patents (SEPs) has become increasingly global, with parallel litigation occurring over the same issues in multiple jurisdictions throughout North America, Europe and Asia. As a result, litigants have sought mechanisms to coordinate these actions both to manage costs and to avoid inconsistent and incompatible results. One little-known procedural mechanism that has long been available to manage multi-jurisdictional litigation, and which is growing in popularity in SEP disputes, is the anti-suit injunction.

An anti-suit injunction is an interlocutory remedy issued by a court in one jurisdiction which prohibits a litigant from initiating or continuing parallel litigation in another …

The Patently Unexceptional Venue Statute, Paul Gugliuzza, Megan M. La Belle

Faculty Scholarship

Legal doctrines developed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit are often derided as “exceptionalist,” particularly on issues of procedure. The court’s interpretation of the venue statute for patent infringement suits seems, at first glance, to fit that mold. According to the Federal Circuit, the statute places few constraints on the plaintiff’s choice of forum when suing corporate defendants. This permissive venue rule has lead critics to suggest that the court is, once again, outside the mainstream. The Supreme Court’s recent grant of certiorari in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods would seem to indicate that those critics …

Patent Injunctions On Appeal: An Empirical Study Of The Federal Circuit's Application Of Ebay, Christopher B. Seaman, Ryan T. Holte

Scholarly Articles

More than ten years after the United States Supreme Court’s landmark decision in eBay v. MercExchange, the availability of injunctive relief in patent cases remains hotly contested. For example, in a recent decision in the long-running litigation between Apple and Samsung, members of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit divided sharply on whether an injunction was warranted to prevent Samsung from continuing to infringe several smartphone features patented by Apple. To date, however, nearly all empirical scholarship regarding eBay has focused on trial court decisions, rather than the Federal Circuit.

This Article represents the first …

The Field Of Invention, Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Faculty Scholarship

Federal courts can ill afford to ignore, assume, or improvise a pervasively important administrative power that the Patent Office exercises regularly and effectively: technology classification. This agency-court asymmetry has persisted for decades but has now become unmanageably problematic for two related reasons. First, Supreme Court guidance, patent reform legislation, and academic commentary have all broadly rejected long-standing patent exceptionalism in administrative law, while making the Patent Office a major substitute for federal courts in resolving patent disputes. Still, patent doctrine has been slow to correct, particularly in judicial deference to agency action. Second, criticisms of the patent system are highly …

Patent Law's Reproducibility Paradox, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

Clinical research faces a reproducibility crisis. Many recent clinical and preclinical studies appear to be irreproducible; their results cannot be verified by outside researchers. This is problematic for not only scientific reasons but legal ones: patents grounded in irreproducible research appear to fail their constitutional bargain of property rights in exchange for working disclosures of inventions. The culprit is likely patent law’s doctrine of enablement. Although the doctrine requires patents to enable others to make and use their claimed inventions, current difficulties in applying the doctrine mitigate or even actively dissuade reproducible data in patents. This Article assesses the difficulties …

Humanizing Intellectual Property: Moving Beyond The Natural Rights Property Focus, J. Janewa Oseitutu

Faculty Publications

This Article compares the natural rights property framework with the human rights framework for intellectual property. These two frameworks share a common theoretical basis in the natural rights tradition, but they appear to lead to conflicting outcomes. Proponents of natural rights to intellectual property tend to support more expansive intellectual property protections. Advocates of a human rights approach to intellectual property contend, however, that human rights will have a moderating influence on intellectual property law. This Article is among the first scholarly works to explore the apparent conflict between these two important frameworks for intellectual property. It concludes that a …

Reinvention, Sean B. Seymore

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

It is axiomatic that once an invention has been patented, it cannot be patented again. This aligns with the quid pro quo theory of patents — the public would receive nothing new in exchange for the second patent. Enforcing this rule is done through the novelty requirement, which bars a patent if the invention is already known. But the rule is hard to justify if the original patentee reneged on the quid pro quo by inadequately disclosing how to make and use the invention. The inadequate disclosure suggests that the original inventor did not invent anything and the public received …

The Rise Of Ethical License, Christi Guerrini, Margaret Curnette, Jacob S. Sherkow, Christopher Scott

Other Publications

The Broad Institute's recent licensing of its gene editing patent portfolio demonstrates how licenses can be used to restrict controversial applications of emerging technologies while society deliberates their implications.

Trust: A Model For Disclosure In Patent Law, Ari Ezra Waldman

Articles & Chapters

How to draw the line between public and private is a foundational, first-principles question of privacy law, but the answer has implications for intellectual property, as well. This project is the first in a series of papers about first-person disclosures of information in the privacy and intellectual property law contexts, and it defines the boundary between public and non-public information through the lens of social science — namely, principles of trust.

Patent law’s “public use” bar confronts the question of whether legal protection should extend to information previously disclosed to a small group of people. I present evidence that shows …

Functionality Screens, Christopher Buccafusco, Mark A. Lemley

Articles

Among intellectual property (IP) doctrines, only utility patents should protect function. Utility patents offer strong rights that place constraints on competition, but they only arise when inventors can demonstrate substantial novelty after a costly examination. Copyrights, trademarks, and design patents are much easier to obtain than utility patents, and they often last much longer. Accordingly, to prevent claimants from obtaining “backdoor patents,” the other IP doctrines must screen out functionality. As yet, however, courts and scholars have paid little systematic attention to the ways in which these functionality screens operate across and within IP law.We have four tasks in this …

Patent Protection For Crispr: An Elsi Review, Jacob S. Sherkow

Articles & Chapters

The revolutionary gene-editing technology, CRISPR, has raised numerous ethical, legal, and social concerns over its use. The technology is also subject to an increasing patent thicket that raises similar issues concerning patent licensing and research development. This essay reviews several of these challenges that have come to the fore since CRISPR’s development in 2012. In particular, the lucre and complications that have followed the CRISPR patent dispute may affect scientific collaboration among academic research institutions. Relatedly, universities’ adoption of “surrogate licensors” may also hinder downstream research. At the same time, research scientists and their institutions have also used CRISPR patents …

Which Supreme Court Cases Influenced Recent Supreme Court Ip Decisions? A Citation Study, Joseph S. Miller

Scholarly Works

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided an increasing number of intellectual property cases — especially patent cases — over the last several terms. Which prior cases influence the stated reasoning in these recent Supreme Court IP cases? A handful of citation studies of supreme courts in the U.S., both state and federal, conducted over the last 40 years suggest that the Court would most often cite its own prior cases; that it would cite its more recent cases more often than its older cases; and that a small number of its prior cases would receive a large share of the …

Much Ado About The Tpp's Effect On Pharmaceuticals, Emily M. Morris

Faculty Publications

The Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement’s many provisions that were beneficial to the pharmaceutical industry have caused a good deal of controversy. Specifically, critics allege that the TPP’s provisions requiring that member states expand patentable subject matter, adjust pharmaceutical patent terms, and link regulatory marketing approval to a drug's patent status would have raised drug prices and hindered access to medicines, particularly in developing countries. Closer examination of these provisions as well as the various ways in which member states can modify or ameliorate the effects of these provisions suggests that their potential effect on drug prices and access to health care …

Inventive Steps: The Crispr Patent Dispute And Scientific Progress, Jacob S. Sherkow

Other Publications

Recent decisions by patent offices in the USA and Europe concerning the revolutionary gene-editing technology, CRISPR/Cas9, have shed light on the importance — and puzzles — of one particular area of patent law: “nonobviousness”, as it known in the USA, or, in Europe, the “inventive step”. Patent law does not always neatly align itself with the realities of biological research. But these competing decisions from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office have put those differences on parade. Unpacking these standards for CRISPR tell us a lot about how advances in biology are actually made — …

Crispr, Surrogate Licensing, And Scientific Discovery, Jorge Contreras, Jacob S. Sherkow

Other Publications

Several research institutions are embroiled in a legal dispute over the foundational patent rights to CRISPR-Cas9 gene-editing technology, and it may take years for their competing claims to be resolved. But even before ownership of the patents is finalized, the institutions behind CRISPR have wasted no time capitalizing on the huge market for this groundbreaking technology by entering into a series of licensing agreements with commercial enterprises. With respect to the potentially lucrative market for human therapeutics and treatments, each of the key CRISPR patent holders has granted exclusive rights to a spinoff or "surrogate" company formed by the institution …

A Biotechnology-Centric Look At Fee Shifting In Patent Litigation Post-Octane Fitness, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies decision (Akamai III), in conjunction with the Federal Circuit’s stance on divided infringement claims, effectively undermined the value of method claims, particularly in the realm of pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, and other biotechnology related innovation, by limiting the ability of patentees to establish liability in cases where steps of the claimed method are performed by multiple parties. On remand, the en banc Federal Circuit in Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks (Akamai IV) sought to address the problem by expanding the definition of direct infringement under 271(a) to encompass more scenarios …

Aggregated Royalties For Top-Down Frand Determinations: Revisiting "Joint Negotiation", Jorge L. Contreras

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

In an environment in which widely-adopted technical standards may each be covered by large numbers of patents, there have been increasing calls for courts to determine “fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory” (FRAND) royalties payable to holders of standardsessential patents (SEPs) using “top-down” methodologies. Top-down royalty approaches begin with the aggregate royalty that should be payable with respect to all SEPs covering a particular standard, and then allocate a portion of the total to individual SEPs. Top-down approaches avoid many drawbacks associated with bottom-up approaches in which royalties for individual SEPs are assessed, often in an inconsistent and piecemeal manner, without regard …

Eli Lilly V. Teva: Generic Companies Infringe Under Akamai Iv In Case Of Divided Infringement, Christopher M. Holman

Faculty Works

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Limelight Networks v. Akamai Technologies decision (Akamai III), in conjunction with the Federal Circuit’s stance on divided infringement claims, effectively undermined the value of method claims, particularly in the realm of pharmaceuticals, diagnostics, and other biotechnology related innovation, by limiting the ability of patentees to establish liability in cases where steps of the claimed method are performed by multiple parties. On remand, the en banc Federal Circuit in Akamai Technologies v. Limelight Networks (Akamai IV) sought to address the problem by expanding the definition of direct infringement under 271(a) to encompass more scenarios …

Frontiers In Precision Medicine Ii: Cancer, Big Data And The Public, Emily Coonrod, Jorge L. Contreras, Willard Dere, Jeffrey Botkin, Leslie Francis, Jim Tabery

Utah Law Faculty Scholarship

Precision medicine is being developed within a complex landscape of public policy, science, economics, law, and regulation. In these and other policy areas, the goal of developing individually-tailored therapies poses novel challenges for health care research, delivery and policy. In this symposium, a range of experts in genetics, medicine, bioinformatics, intellectual property, health economics and bioethics identified and discussed many of the pressing questions raised by the development and practice of precision medicine. These and other issues will need to be taken into account as precision medicine moves ahead and becomes the standard of medical practice and care in the …

What's In, And What's Out: How Ip's Boundary Rules Shape Innovation, Mark Mckenna, Christopher J. Sprigman

Journal Articles

Intellectual property law sorts subject matter into a variety of different regimes, each with different terms of protection and different rules of protectability, infringement, and defenses. For that sorting to be effective, IP needs principles to distinguish the subject matter of each system. This paper focuses on one of the most important aspects of border-drawing that our IP system undertakes — identifying “useful” subject matter.

This aspect is critical because our IP system gives utility patent law pride of place and draws the boundaries of the other doctrines in large part to respect utility patent’s supremacy. Yet IP law’s sense …