Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Computational Experimentation, Tabrez Y. Ebrahim
Computational Experimentation, Tabrez Y. Ebrahim
Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law
Experimentation conjures images of laboratories and equipment in biotechnology, chemistry, materials science, and pharmaceuticals. Yet modern day experimentation is not limited to only chemical synthesis, but is increasingly computational. Researchers in the unpredictable arts can experiment upon the functions, properties, reactions, and structures of chemical compounds with highly accurate computational techniques. These computational capabilities challenge the enablement and utility patentability requirements. The patent statute requires that the inventor explain how to make and use the invention without undue experimentation and that the invention have at least substantial and specific utility. These patentability requirements do not align with computational research capabilities, …
Patenting The Unexplained, Sean B. Seymore
Patenting The Unexplained, Sean B. Seymore
Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications
It is a bedrock principle of patent law that an inventor need not understand how or why an invention works. The patent statute simply requires that the inventor explain how to make and use the invention. But explaining how to make and use something without understanding how or why it works yields patents with uninformative disclosures. Their teaching function is limited; one who wants to understand or figure out the underlying scientific principles must turn elsewhere. This limited disclosure rule does not align with the norms of science and tends to make patent documents a less robust form of technical …
Implied Obviousness: Reevaluating The Jury's Role In Nonobviousness After Kinetic Concepts, Michael A. Silliman
Implied Obviousness: Reevaluating The Jury's Role In Nonobviousness After Kinetic Concepts, Michael A. Silliman
Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law
Nonobviousness is a central patentability requirement, requiring that a person with ordinary skill would not have found the patented subject matter obvious. Due to its flexibility, obviousness is the most commonly litigated requirement. It is thus crucial that the US judicial system determine obviousness uniformly, predictably, and accurately. However, because nonobviousness is a mixed question of law and fact, it is often unclear how much control the judge and jury have over the ultimate conclusion. In Kinetic Concepts v. Smith & Nephew, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit increased the jury's role in the obviousness determination, …