Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

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, …

Use Of Mediation To Recover Rights To Our Genes, Rachel Albert

Pepperdine Dispute Resolution Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Trademark Boundaries And 3d Printing, Lucas S. Osborn

Akron Law Review

3D printing technology promises to disrupt trademark law at the same time that trademark law and policy sustain repeated criticism. The controversial growth of trademark law over the last century has yielded amorphous sponsorship and affiliation confusion issues and empirically fragile post-sale and initial-interest confusion theories, among others. Into this melee marches 3D printing technology, which dissociates the process of design from that of manufacturing and democratizes manufacturing. Rather than being embodied only in physical objects, design is embodied in digital CAD files that users can post and sell on the internet. The digitization of physical objects raises fundamental questions …

Reconsidering Experimental Use, Rochelle Cooper Dreyfuss

Akron Law Review

In the years since the Supreme Court began to narrow the scope of patentable subject matter, uncertainties in the law have had a deleterious impact on several important innovation sectors, including, in particular, the life sciences industry. There are now initiatives to expand patentable subject matter legislatively. In this article, I suggest that the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence is an outgrowth of the concern that patents on fundamental discoveries impede scientific research. To deal with that issue, any measure to expand the subject matter of patenting should be coupled with a parallel expansion of defenses to infringement liability, including the restoration …

Patent Submission Policies, Ryan T. Holte

Akron Law Review

This Article focuses on the early stage of commercialization communication when a third-party inventor owns an invention protected by a patent that a manufacturer-commercializer may profit from producing—long before any allegation of infringement or litigation. These submission-review communications by unaffiliated third parties are covered by corporate policies known as “patent submission policies.” They are the figurative “front doors” to a company for any third-party inventor, crucial to the commercialization of inventions generally. Unfortunately, patent submission policies have thus far remained unstudied in legal academic scholarship.

This Article collects and analyzes the current variations of patent submission policies adopted by the …

Patent Arbitration: The Underutilized Process For Resolving International Patent Disputes In The Pharmaceutical And Biotechnology Industries, Alessandra Emini

Arbitration Law Review (2009 - Present)

No abstract provided.

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 …

The Ieee-Sa Revised Patent Policy And Its Definition Of “Reasonable” Rates: A Transatlantic Antitrust Divide?, Nicolas Petit

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Standards Association’s (“IEEE-SA”) updated patent policy and a business review letter issued by the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) have caused much discussion in the United States. The purpose of this Article is to assess whether a similarly lenient antitrust approach to Standard Setting Organizations’ (“SSOs”) rate-setting policies would prevail under the European Union’s (“EU”) competition rules. Recent EU competition case law has promoted a very hard line in the area of coordinated conduct. Cases such as Dole Food Company, Inc. v. European Commission, T-Mobile Netherlands BV v. Raad van bestuur van …

Data-Generating Patents, Brenda M. Simon, Ted Sichelman

Northwestern University Law Review

Patents and trade secrets are often considered economic substitutes. Under this view, inventors can decide either to maintain an invention as a trade secret or to seek a patent and disclose to the public the details of the invention. However, a handful of scholars have recognized that because the patent disclosure requirements are not always rigorous, inventors may sometimes be able to keep certain aspects of an invention secret, yet still receive a patent to the invention as a whole. Here, we provide further insight into how trade secrets and patents may act as complements. Specifically, we introduce the concept …

Damages For Partial Product Design Patent Infringement, Patryk Oskar Rogowski

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Method Patent Exceptionalism, Timothy R. Holbrook

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

Inventive methods and processes have long received hostile treatment by the patent system. Courts have long been skeptical of these claims because of the potential for overbreadth of the patent, particularly if the method is delineated in functional terms. This categorical skepticism, however, fails to consider the technological specificity of such concerns. For example, the pharmaceutical industry views method claims, particularly methods of use and treatment, as weaker, second-tier forms of protection. While important, patents on the chemical compound itself offers greater downstream protection over all uses of the compound.

Nevertheless, process claims have received differential treatment in patent law. …

The Federal Circuit’S Acquiescence (?), Timothy R. Holbrook

Sturm College of Law: Faculty Scholarship

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is a unique institution within the federal judiciary. It is the only intermediate appellate court with nationwide jurisdiction over particular subject matter. Only the Supreme Court has the same national geographic scope. Of particular importance is its appellate jurisdiction over cases arising under the patent laws. It is also unique that, given its patent expertise, it also oversees an expert agency, the United States Patent and Trademark Office. This Essay explores the relationship of the Federal Circuit vis-à-vis the Supreme Court and the USPTO over three periods of time. It first …

Patently Insane For Patents: A Judge-By-Judge Analysis Of The Federal Circuit’S Post-Alice Patentable Subject Matter Eligibility Of Abstract Ideas Jurisprudence, Matthew B. Hershkowitz

Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal

The Information Age exposed the U.S. patent system to patentable subject matter that it had never considered before. In particular, software tested the courts’ understanding of patentable subject matter under section 101 of title 35 of the U.S. Code. The Supreme Court grappled with this issue in its Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International decision, which greatly affected the patentability of software. However, the Supreme Court did not define the precise contours of patentable subject matter in Alice, and as a result, the Federal Circuit has wrestled with its meaning ever since. This Note discusses the approaches Federal Circuit judges …

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 …

Using Data Exclusivity Grants To Incentivize Cumulative Innovation Of Biologics' Manufacturing Processes, Eric Lawrence Levi

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

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

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Redefining Reality: Why Design Patent Protection Should Expand To The Virtual World, John R. Boulé Iii

American University Law Review

Virtual reality (“VR”) and augmented reality (“AR”) technologies are rapidly maturing. Companies like Facebook and Microsoft are capitalizing on these technologies and actively releasing products to consumers. Both companies’ products blur the line between the real world and the virtual world. The blurring of this line presents novel questions regarding the protection of digital intellectual property that exists solely within the virtual world.

One such question is whether design patent protection will be available to three-dimensional digital models, models of real-world items that are digitally reproduced in the virtual world. To receive design patent protection, 35 U.S.C. § 171 requires, …

Private Or Public Right? Who Should Adjudicate Patentability Disputes And Is The Current Scheme Really Constitutional?, Jasmyne M. Baynard

Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review

“The patent bargain is the foundation upon which the patent system is built: in exchange for protections for an invention, the inventor agrees to make public their inventions so that others may build upon it.” The patent bargain creates a presumption of protection for the inventors, yet categorizing the patent a public right or a private right has diminished expectations for inventors and confusion for the masses. On October 11, 2016, the Supreme Court denied two petitions for writ of certiorari that challenged the constitutionality of Patent Trial and Review Board proceedings on the basis of the patent owner’s Seventh …

The Circular Logic Of Actavis, Joshua B. Fischman

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Federal Circuit's Acquiescence (?), Timothy R. Holbrook

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Protecting Fashion Designs: Not Only "What?" But "Who?", Julie Zerbo

American University Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Implications Of A Revitalized 28 U.S.C. 1400(B): Identifying The Regular And Established Place Of Business For Patent Venue In The Internet Age, Steven Pepe, Samuel Brenner

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Big Patent Short: Hedge Fund Challenges To Pharmaceutical Patents And The Need For Financial Regulation, Ariel D. Multak

Fordham Journal of Corporate & Financial Law

The enactment of the America Invents Act (AIA) in 2011 ushered in a new system for post-grant patent review. In the interest of enhancing the efficiency of the patent regime by invalidating “bad” patents, certain requirements were relaxed. For example, the AIA created an examination process called inter partes review, which allows a party without legal standing to challenge the validity of a patent in front of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. In the pharmaceutical patent context, it was expected that inter partes review would be utilized mostly by generic drug makers seeking to invalidate patents without incurring the …

Understanding The Role Of Prosecution History Through Linguistics, Zachary Herman

Cybaris®

No abstract provided.

Patent Submission Policies, Ryan T. Holte

Akron Law Faculty Publications

This Article focuses on the early stage of commercialization communication when a third-party inventor owns an invention protected by a patent that a manufacturer-commercializer may profit from producing—long before any allegation of infringement or litigation. These submission-review communications by unaffiliated third parties are covered by corporate policies known as “patent submission policies.” They are the figurative “front doors” to a company for any third-party inventor, crucial to the commercialization of inventions generally. Unfortunately, patent submission policies have thus far remained unstudied in legal academic scholarship.

A Taste Of The Current Protection Offered By Intellectual Property Law To Molecular Gastronomy, Mary Grace Hyland

Cybaris®

No abstract provided.

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 …