Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Restoring The Genetic Commons: A Common Sense Approach To Biotechnology Patents In The Wake Of Ksr V. Teleflex , Anna Bartow Laakmann

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

In this Article, I argue that a new approach to biotechnology patenting is necessary to fully realize the tremendous potential of recent advances in our understanding of the human genome. Part I places the gene patenting debate in context by highlighting the key landmarks that have shaped the biotechnology industry and outlining the products and stakeholders that comprise the industry. Part II describes the current state of the law on biotechnology patents, summarizing the Federal Circuit's application of the various doctrines that collectively define the patent landscape's parameters. In this Part, I explain how the Federal Circuit's jurisprudence is tied …

The Supreme Court And The Federal Circuit: Visitation And Custody Of Patent Law, Rebecca S. Eisenberg

Articles

The U.S. Supreme Court’s relationship to patent law sometimes seems like that of a non-custodial parent who spends an occasional weekend with the kids. The custodial parent is, of course, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 consolidated intermediate appellate jurisdiction over patent law cases in this single court, which hears appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), the U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, and the U.S. In-ternational Trade Commission. Day to day it is the Federal Circuit that reviews contested decisions of the institutions …

The Measure Of The Doubt: Dissent, Indeterminacy, And Interpretation At The Federal Circuit, Jeffrey A. Lefstin

ExpressO

The law of patent claim interpretation articulated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is commonly supposed to be markedly indeterminate, and to be responsible for a lack of certainty and predictability in patent infringement litigation. But there has been no attempt to measure objectively the indeterminacy associated with patent claim interpretation, or, for that matter, of any other field of law. This Article shows that under appropriate conditions the indeterminacy of a legal regime may be measured empirically by the frequency of judicial dissents. Application of this method to the Federal Circuit's jurisprudence demonstrates that …

The Federal Circuit And The Supreme Court, Arthur J. Gajarsa, Lawrence P. Cogswell

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

2005 Trademark Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Stephen R. Baird

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Easing The Claim Construction Blow With Early-Discovery Markman Hearings That Are Appealable To The Federal Circuit On An Interlocutory Basis, Srikanth K. Reddy

Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property

No abstract provided.

Patent Law Viewed Through An Evidentiary Lens: The "Suggestion Test" As A Rule Of Evidence, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

The Federal Circuit's recent nonobviousness jurisprudence has been the subject of much criticism. Reports from the Federal Trade Commission and the National Research Council and a pending petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court all conclude that the Federal Circuit has improperly relaxed the nonobviousness standard. Most of this criticism focuses on the Federal Circuit's implementation of part of the nonobviousness inquiry - the suggestion test. The suggestion test queries whether a suggestion to make the invention existed before the invention's creation. The Federal Circuit allegedly requires a suggestion to come solely from prior art references. The court ignores other …

Enhancing Patent Disclosure For Faithful Claim Construction, Joe Miller

Scholarly Works

Claim construction jurisprudence is in disarray. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reverses trial court claim construction decisions at a worryingly high rate. The proportion of Federal Circuit claim construction opinions that include separate concurrences or dissents continues to grow. And the muddled mix of issues the Federal Circuit framed for en banc review in the Phillips case suggests that the court is having trouble reaching consensus on what the central questions are, much less on how to answer them. Perhaps the path to adequately predictable claim construction is continued tinkering with the analytical constructs internal to …

Substantive Versus Process-Based Formalism In Claim Construction, Timothy R. Holbrook

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in recent years has embraced the use of bright-line formalistic rules in the interest of increasing certainty in patent law. This formalistic approach pervades the court's jurisprudence and extends far beyond claim construction. The Supreme Court has also expressed an interest in certainty in patent law, but its approach has varied from that of the Federal Circuit. Whereas the Federal Circuit has articulated bright-line substantive rules that are outcome determinative, the Supreme Court has articulated process-based formalistic rules, such as the use of rebuttable presumptions, which do not preordain a certain …

The Experimental Purpose Doctrine And Biomedical Research, Tao Huang

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The experimental use doctrine is a common law rule in patent law that until a few years ago excused accused infringers who made and used patented products or processes on the basis of an experimental, educational, or nonprofit purpose when there was de minimis economic injury to the patent owner and de minimis economic gain to the infringer. While the application of the experimental purpose doctrine was always narrow, two recent Federal Circuit decisions indicate that there is not much left under its aegis. In Madey v. Duke University, the Federal Circuit strictly limited the application of the experimental purpose …

The Future Role Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit Now That It Has Turned 21, Richard Linn

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Adrift On A Sea Of Uncertainty: Preserving Uniformity In Patent Law Post-Vornado Through Deference To The Federal Circuit, Larry D. Thompson

Scholarly Works

Congress created the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 1982, and granted that court exclusive appellate jurisdiction over civil actions arising under patent law. Congress's primary goals in creating the Federal Circuit were to produce a more uniform patent jurisprudence and to reduce forum shopping based on favorable patent law. But in the 2002 decision of Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Air Circulation Systems, the Supreme Court held that patent counterclaims alone could not create Federal Circuit jurisdiction. This decision not only overruled the Federal Circuit's longstanding jurisdictional rule, but also opened the door for Regional …

Zurko, Gartside, And Lee: How Might They Affect Patent Prosecution?, Thomas G. Field Jr

Law Faculty Scholarship

Interactions between the PTO and the courts are more complex than for most agencies. PTO decisions may be challenged not only directly but also collaterally. In the latter context, the Supreme Court has sometimes been critical of the lax standards applied when issuing patents.

While being upheld in collateral review is the ultimate issue of concern to patentees, patents must first be obtained. Thus, this paper focuses on direct challenges to PTO actions--and more specifically, on the review arising under 35 U.S.C. §§ 141-44 as addressed in Zurko, Gartside, and Lee.

Since the Supreme Court reversed the …

Introduction: The Law, Technology & The Arts Symposium: The Past, Present And Future Of The Federal Circuit, Craig Allen Nard

Faculty Publications

Introduction to The Law, Technology & the Arts Symposium: The Past, Present and Future of the Federal Circuit, Cleveland, Ohio.

Counterclaims, The Well-Pleaded Complaint, And Federal Jurisdiction, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

This Article proceeds as follows: Part I of the Article begins by laying the statutory and constitutional foundation of "arising under" jurisdiction. The current connection between "arising under" jurisdiction and federal question jurisdiction is discussed. Part I also fully sets forth the well-pleaded complaint rule, and discusses removal jurisdiction, which is governed by the concept of "arising under" jurisdiction. As necessary background to understanding the Court's reasoning in Holmes and why the case prompts a general discussion on federal jurisdiction implications, Part I concludes by defining a district court's jurisdiction over patent cases, the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction over patent …

Obvious To Whom? Evaluating Inventions From The Perspective Of Phosita, Rebecca S. Eisenberg

Articles

In this Article, I consider the possibility of giving the USPTO input from currently active technological practitioners in evaluating the obviousness of claimed inventions. Such input could potentially serve three useful functions. First, it could improve the accuracy of USPTO decisionmaking by providing access to the perspective of actual practitioners as to the obviousness of inventions from the perspective of the hypothetical PHOSITA. Second, it could help the USPTO document the evidentiary basis for rejections that rest in part upon tacit knowledge within technological communities. Third, it could provide a quality control mechanism that would improve the credibility of USPTO …

Arising Under Jurisdiction And Uniformity In Patent Law, Christopher A. Cotropia

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The law governing the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction was brought into question in Holmes Group, Inc. v. Vornado Circulation Systems, Inc. The Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction over Vornado's appeal rested solely on Vornado's counterclaim alleging patent infringement by Holmes. Holmes's complaint sought a declaratory judgment of no trade dress infringement and did not include any patent law claims. While the Federal Circuit found appellate jurisdiction over Vornado's appeal based on the counterclaim of patent infringement, the Supreme Court disagreed. The Court focused on the language in 35 U.S.C. § 1338(a), which defines the Federal Circuit's appellate jurisdiction by the statute's …

The Supreme Court’S Complicity In Federal Circuit Formalism, Timothy R. Holbrook

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

This Essay was prepared to celebrate the 20th Anniversary of the Santa Clara Computer and High Technology Law Journal and, particularly, the influence of Donald Chisum's seminal article from this journal, The Scope of Protection for Patents After the Supreme Court's Warner-Jenkinson Decision: The Fair Protection-Certainty Conundrum, 14 Santa Clara Computer & High Tech L. J. 1 (1998).

In this Essay, I explore the role the Supreme Court played in facilitating the Federal Circuit's embrace of bright-line, formalistic rules. This Essay will first identifies the various ways in which the Federal Circuit has opted for the "certainty" side of the …

Bayh-Dole Reform And The Progress Of Biomedicine, Arti K. Rai, Rebecca S. Eisenberg

Articles

Advances in fundamental biomedical research play an important and growing role in the development of new therapeutic and diagnostic products. Although the development of pharmaceutical end products has long been a proprietary enterprise, biomedical research comes from a very different tradition of open science. Within this tradition, long-standing norms call for relatively unfettered access to fundamental knowledge developed by prior researchers. The tradition of open science has eroded considerably over the past quarter century as proprietary claims have reached farther upstream from end products to cover fundamental discoveries that provide the knowledge base for future product development.

Business Method Patents And Their Limits: Justifications, History, And The Emergence Of A Claim Construction Jurisprudence, Nicholas A. Smith

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Scholars, practitioners, and even popular media spilled much ink over business method patents in the late 1990s, eager to discuss the shift in jurisprudence that enabled patent holders to enforce business method patents for the first time. Since that initial period of excitement--during which businesses filed record numbers of applications for business method patents, and numerous articles tracing the doctrinal shift were published--commentators have written little on the topic. Various patent holders, however, have since litigated business method patent claims. During these first few years after judicial endorsement of business method patents, such litigation has focused on the scope of …

Festo: A Case Contravening The Convergence Of Doctrine Of Equivalents Jurisprudence In Germany, The United Kingdom, And The United States, Katherine E. White

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Despite differences in patent law jurisprudence in Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States, the fundamental principles underlying each system serve the same basic purpose: to encourage technological innovation and dissemination of knowledge. In granting exclusive patent rights, it is important that the scope of patent protection not be so broad as to remove existing knowledge from the public domain. The scope of protection should strike a balance between granting adequate patent rights while preserving the public's ownership in the public domain or the prior art. To encourage innovation patentees must attain significant exclusive rights, while potential infringers receive …

2001 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit , Jaseph Ferraro

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Direct Judicial Review Of Pto Decisions: Jurisdictional Proposals, Thomas G. Field Jr

Law Faculty Scholarship

Judicial review of U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") decisions is complex-- perhaps more than that of any other agency. One source of complexity is that courts review its decisions both collaterally and directly.

One goal of this article is to map possible routes to judicial review and suggest strategies for avoiding jurisdictional uncertainties and delay. The core thesis of this article, however, is that parties should not need to cope with arcane review schemes. Direct PTO review can and ought to be simplified. This can be accomplished by adjusting the Federal Circuit's original and appellate jurisdiction.

Chevron Deference To The Uspto At The Federal Circuit, Thomas G. Field Jr.

Law Faculty Scholarship

Courts have long deferred to agency views of law, but they have also often refused. The Federal Circuit, too, defers on some occasions but not others. This paper examines the apparent inconsistency in its cases.

Patent Law: Attorney-Client Privilege In Patent Litigation: Did The Federal Circuit Go Far Enough With In Re Spalding Sports Worldwide?, Matthew R. Rodgers

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Internet Business Model Patents: Obvious By Analogy, Margo A. Bagley

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Article contends that part of the problem of Internet business model patents is the narrow view of analogous art employed by judges and USPTO examiners which largely excludes relevant "real-world" prior art in the determination of non-obviousness under § 103 of the Patent Act. Consequently, part of the solution lies in helping courts and the USPTO properly to define analogous art for a particular invention. To do so, judges and examiners must recognize the interchangeability of computer programming (i.e. "e-world" activities) to perform a function, with human or mechanical performance of the same function (i.e. "real world" activities). Such …

Defining The Proper Scope Of Internet Patents: If We Don't Know Where We Want To Go, We're Unlikely To Get There, Vincent Chiappetta

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Part I of this Article addresses the appropriateness of protecting Internet innovations under the current patent regime. It concludes that the doctrinal, historical and policy arguments require different outcomes regarding computing (patentable subject matter) and competitive arts (at best a difficult fit) innovation. Part II argues that the new electronic economy has given rise to a particular kind of competitive arts "market failure" (interference with first-to-move lead-time incentives) which must be addressed. It concludes, however, that tinkering with the existing patent or copyright regimes is not only complex, but poses significant risks, and should be avoided. Part III sketches the …

E-Obviousness, Glynn S. Lunney Jr.

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

As patents expand into e-commerce and methods of doing business more generally, both the uncertainty and the risk of unjustified market power that the present approach generates suggest a need to rethink our approach to nonobviousness. If courts fail to enforce the nonobviousness requirement and allow an individual to obtain a patent for simply implementing existing methods of doing business through a computer, even where only trivial technical difficulties are presented, entire e-markets might be handed over to patent holders with no concomitant public benefit. If courts attempt to enforce the nonobviousness requirement, but leave undefined the extent of the …

Review Of The 1999 Trademark Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit , Stephen R. Baird

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Review Of The 1999 Patent Law Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit , Phil N. Makrogiannis

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.