Intellectual Property Law Commons^™

Why Fdca Section 505(U) Should Not Concern Us Greatly, Kyle Faget

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Among the many amendments found in the Food and Drug Administration Amendment Act of 2007 (FDAAA) is a provision at the end of the act, Section 505(u), which grants chiral switches five years of market exclusivity under certain circumstances. Prior to Congressional enactment of the FDAAA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) refused to award new chemical entity (NCE) status to enantiomers of previously approved racemic mixtures. The FDA defines a new chemical entity ("NCE") as a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by the FDA in any other application submitted under Section 505(b) of the …

Appellate Review Of Patent Claim Construction: Should The Federal Circuit Be Its Own Lexicographer In Matters Related To The Seventh Amendment, Eileen M. Herlihy

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The Federal Circuit stated in an en banc decision in Cybor Corp. v. FAS Technologies, Inc. that the construction of patent claims is "a purely legal issue," and is therefore subject to de novo review on appeal. The Cybor decision reaffirmed the position of the majority of the Federal Circuit which had been announced in its en banc Markman decision, and proclaimed that the de novo standard of review is supported by the Supreme Court's Markman decision, a Seventh Amendment opinion. However, Cybor included strong opposition to a de novo standard of review from some of the judges of the …

Is Novelty Obsolete - Chronicling The Irrelevance Of The Invention Date In U.S. Patent Law, Dennis D. Crouch

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This paper presents a normative study of patent prosecution by examining the role that invention-date-based novelty rights play in U.S. patent law. Three sources inform the primary results: the prosecution history files of 21,000+ patent applications filed in the past decade; a survey of 1,000+ patent practitioners regarding their use of the novelty provisions of the Patent Act; and a collection of 11,000,000+ prior art references cited in recently-issued patents. Additional compilations of prosecution file histories for patents identified as either (1) valuable or (2) worthless supplement these data sets and allow for an evaluation of the differential importance of …

Copying In Patent Law, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

Patent law is virtually alone in intellectual property (IP) in punishing independent development. To infringe a copyright or trade secret, defendants must copy the protected IP from the plaintiff, directly or indirectly. But patent infringement requires only that the defendant's product falls within the scope of the patent claims. Not only doesn't the defendant need to intend to infringe, but the defendant may be entirely unaware of the patent or the patentee and still face liability. Nonetheless, copying does play a role in some subsidiary patent doctrines, including damages rules, willfulness, and obviousness. More significantly, the rhetoric of patent law …

2008 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Court A Review Of Recent Decisions Of The United States Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit: Area Summaries, Todd Zubler, Nina Tallon, Jamie Wisz, Jamaica Szeliga

American University Law Review

The United States Supreme Court took a slight breather from patent-law issues in 2008. After issuing three patent-law decisions in 2007 (including KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.), the Court issued just one patent-law decision in 2008—Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. Despite the Supreme Court’s slower pace, however, the Court’s influence loomed large in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in 2008. In a number of cases, the Federal Circuit continued to work through the implications of the Supreme Court’s recent precedents, most notably KSR and the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in eBay Inc. …

Enabling After-Arising Technology, Kevin Emerson Collins

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Intellectual Liability, Daniel A. Crane

Articles

Intellectual property is increasingly a misnomer since the right to exclude is the defining characteristic of property and incentives to engage in inventive and creative activity are increasingly being granted in the form of liability rights (which allow the holder of the right to collect a royalty from users) rather than property rights (which allow the holder of the right to exclude others from using the invention or creation). Much of this recent reorientation in the direction of liability rules arises from a concern over holdout or monopoly power in intellectual property. The debate over whether liability rules or property …

Serendipity, Sean B. Seymore

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Serendipity, the process of finding something of value initially unsought, has played a prominent role in modern science and technology. These "happy accidents" have spawned new fields of science, broken intellectual and technological barriers, and furnished countless products that have altered the course of human history. In the realm of patent law, one curious aspect of accidental discoveries that has received little attention in the academic literature and the courts is how they mesh with the substantive law of invention. This Essay shows that applying conventional doctrines to accidental inventions is theoretically untenable and, in certain circumstances, may result in …

Biopiracy: The Struggle For Traditional Knowledge Rights, John Reid

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Pto And The Market For Influence In Patent Law, Clarisa Long

Faculty Scholarship

As statutory schemes go, the patent statute has been relatively stable from 1952 to the present. In contrast to copyright law, where Congress has taken a close – indeed at times intense – interest in the details of the statutory scheme, legislative intervention into the patent statute, when it has occurred, has been more limited and narrower in scope. For many reasons, however, patent law has been disequilibrating over time, and calls for patent reform have been increasing in intensity. One of the many factors contributing to this disequilibration in recent years has been the ongoing emergence of the U.S. …

The Family Law Doctrine Of Equivalence, Amy L. Wax

Michigan Law Review

Students of patent law learn the doctrine of equivalents. According to the doctrine, a patent protects an invention that does "the same work in substantially the same way, and accomplish[ es] substantially the same result," as the device described in the patent, even if it differs "'in name, form, or shape." In her new book, Nancy Polikoff has fashioned something like a parallel doctrine for families. Let's call it (with a slight play on words) the family law Doctrine of Equivalence. In today's world, according to Polikoff, a broad set of relationships now plays the same role as marriage and …

Modernizing Patent Law's Inequitable Conduct Doctrine, Christopher A. Cotropia

Law Faculty Publications

This Article's main finding is that the inequitable conduct doctrine has the ability to improve patent quality as long as the inherent tendency to overcomply with the doctrine by overloading the USPTO with information is kept in check. The Article reaches this conclusion by proceeding in five parts. Part II describes the current thinking on the inequitable conduct doctrine, with particular focus on the major critiques of the doctrine and proposed legislative and administrative responses. Part III of the Article begins the construction of a fundamental, conceptual framework for the doctrine by explaining how it impacts both patent quality and …

Of Patents And Property, James Bessen, Michael J. Meurer

Faculty Scholarship

Do patents behave substantially like property rights in tangible assets, in that they encourage development and innovation? This article notes that historical evidence, cross-country evidence, economic experiments, and estimates of net benefits all indicate that general property rights institutions have a substantial direct effect on economic growth. Conversely, with a few important exceptions like chemicals and pharmaceuticals, empirical evidence indicates that intellectual property rights have at best only a weak and indirect effect on economic growth. Further, it appears that for public firms in most industries today, patents may actually discourage investment in innovation for fear of winding up on …

Does The Supreme Court Still Matter?, Timothy B. Dyk

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

2007 Patent Law Decisions Of The Federal Circuit, Dean L. Fanelli, Victor N. Balancia, Robert J. Smyth, Carl P. Bretscher, Arthur M. Antonelli, Mark J. Sullivan, Kent E. Basson

American University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Synopsis Of The Extraterritorial Protection Afforded By Section 337 As Compared To The Patent Act , Neil F. Duchez

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Unlike Section 271 of the Patent Act of 1952, "[s]ection 337 is a trade law which is not necessarily limited by the principles of domestic patent law." When examined more closely, Section 337 of the U.S. Tariff Act of 1930 in effect provides a patentee more protection from infringing foreign activity than Section 271. Accordingly, in many situations involving foreign acts, it may be more advantageous to enforce a U.S. patent at the International Trade Commission ("Commission") as opposed to a federal district court. The analysis discussed infra more closely examines those situations and provides the history behind the intended …

Research Tool Patents After Integra V. Merck - Have They Reached A Safe Harbor, Wolrad Prinz

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

The saga surrounding the Integra v. Merck cases has rekindled a heated debate about the proper scope of both common law exemption and the safe harbor provision, causing significant concern for owners of research tool patents. This Article will argue that the next judicial decision addressing the question of research tool patents should clarify that they are in a safe harbor because none of the two exemptions from infringement referenced above extends to the use of research tools in experiments in order to preserve the necessary incentives for their creation in the first place. Allowing access to research tools under …

Hiding Behind Nationality: The Temporary Presence Exception And Patent Infringement Avoidance, J. Jonas Anderson

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

This Article argues that the temporary presence exception was not designed to allow conveyance owners the ability to select the most optimal patent system under which to be subject. It also examines the ramifications of the temporary presence exception on international commerce and concludes that increased use of the exception may result in reduced values for patents relating to international conveyances, reduced incentives to invest in and develop technologies in international conveyances, and a decrease in the quality of various domestic patent systems worldwide. Finally, this Article proposes a solution to these problems. The temporary presence exception has received some …

The Claim Construction Effect, Lee Petherbridge

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Claim construction refers to the task of construing, or interpreting, the words of patents' claims to establish the metes and bounds of a patent. Theoretically, the task of claim construction serves to operationalize the concept of "invention," which lies at the heart of the U.S. patent system.[...] Rather than focusing on the set of cases in which the Federal Circuit addresses claim construction, this study focuses on a set of cases defined by a different patent doctrine. The basic idea is to explore the impact of claim construction on other areas of patent law.[...] The hypothesis of the claim construction …

Pharma's Nonobvious Problem, Rebecca S. Eisenberg

Articles

This Article considers the effect of the recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. on the nonobviousness standard for patentability as applied to pharmaceutical patents. By calling for an expansive and flexible analysis and disapproving of the use of rigid formulas in evaluating an invention for obviousness, KSR may appear to make it easier for generic competitors to challenge the validity of drug patents. But an examination of the Federal Circuit's nonobviousness jurisprudence in the context of such challenges reveals that the Federal Circuit has been employing all along the sort of flexible …

Noncompliance, Nonenforcement, Nonproblem? Rethinking The Anticommons In Biomedical Research, Rebecca S. Eisenberg

Articles

A decade ago the biomedical research community was sounding alarm bells about the impact of intellectual property (IP) rights on the ability of scientists to do their work. Controversies and delays in negotiating terms of access to patented mice and genes, databases of scientific information, and tangible research materials all pointed toward the same conclusion: that IP claims were undermining traditional sharing norms to the detriment of science. Michael Heller and I highlighted one dimension of this concern: that too many IP rights in "upstream" research results could paradoxically restrict "downstream" research and product development by making it too costly …

Under Construction: Towards A More Deferential Standard Of Review In Claim Construction Cases, Jeffrey Peabody

Maurer Student Articles

No abstract provided.

The Melting Of Patent Law, Eben Moglen

Faculty Scholarship

In this special comment, the author posits that the patent system as it stands is archaic and oppressive, and has neither intellectual nor moral support. Having veered away from its original goals, by virtue of the change in the technological and functional basis of government, it instead serves as a justification for inequalities of wealth distribution. The author argues that substantial reform is required that would shift the balance in patent law from monopolistic greed to public interest, paving the way for access to knowledge.

Inventors, Entrepreneurs, And Intellectual Property Law, Michael J. Meurer

Faculty Scholarship

I am not sure why small business concerns have not had more influence on IP law. Perhaps the sentiment prevailing in antitrust law spilled over into IP law. American antitrust law has reached a near consensus that small firms get no special treatment under a law designed to protect competition, not competitors. ° In contrast, European competition law regulators are more likely to protect small business, and European patent policymakers openly fret about how to reform their patent law to promote small business.²

Regardless, my concern in this Article is mostly with the normative question: Should IP law favor …

Exclusion Confusion? A Defense Of The Federal Circuit's Specific Exclusion Jurisprudence, Peter Curtis Magic

Michigan Law Review

Specific exclusion has become a controversial limitation on the doctrine of equivalents, which is itself an essential and controversial area of patent law. The doctrine of equivalents allows a patentee to successfully claim infringement against devices that are outside of the literal reach of the language used by the patentee in her patent to describe what she claims as her invention. The Supreme Court has prescribed some of the outer limits of the doctrine of equivalents and articulated the underlying policy concerns that inform its analysis-noting that courts should balance protection of the patentee's intellectual property with the public's reasonable …

The "Printed Publication" Bar After Klopfenstein: Has The Federal Circuit Changed The Way Professors Should Talk About Science?, Sean B. Seymore

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

Would-be infringers target university patents because faculty inventors are more likely to make inadvertent disclosures than industrial inventors, possibly because of the importance of quick disclosure and publishing in academic science. In Klopfenstein, the Federal Circuit held that the posting of lecture slides after a talk triggered the printed publication bar of the patent statute. First, I argue (contrary to other commentators) that the Federal Circuit is consistent with prior precedent; that the public accessibility and dissemination inquiries should rest on substance rather than form. The focus of the § 102(b) inquiry remains on the inventor, who should lose the …

Maintaining Competition In Copying: Narrowing The Scope Of Gene Patents, Oskar Liivak

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

In supporting gene patents, the patent office, the courts and other supporters have assumed that gene discoveries are identical to traditional inventions and therefore the patent system should treat them as identical. In other words, they have assumed that the relatively broad claims that are used for traditional inventions are also appropriate for encouraging gene discovery. This article examines this assumption and finds that gene discoveries are critically different from traditional inventions and concludes that the patent system cannot treat them as identical.

As a doctrinal matter, this article applies the generally overlooked constitutional requirements of inventorship and originality and …

Here There Be Pirates: How China Is Meeting Its Ip Enforcement Obligations Under Trips, Kate Colpitts Hunter

San Diego International Law Journal

This paper will examine whether China is meeting its obligations to protect IP rights under the TRIPS agreement, an international intellectual property trade agreement China acceded to upon joining the World Trade Organization (WTO). Moreover, it will address whether China's increased IP protection in law equals increased protection in fact. Part II will describe China's legal structure, its TRIPS obligations upon joining the WTO, and China's IP laws. Part III will discuss China's enforcement of these IP laws from the perspective of developed nations and from China's own perspective. Part IV includes suggestions on how China can improve its enforcement …

Pharmaceutical Lemons: Innovation And Regulation In The Drug Industry, Ariel Katz

Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review

Before a new drug can be marketed, the Food and Drug Administration must be satisfied that it is safe and effective. According to conventional wisdom, the cost and delay involved in this process diminish the incentives to invest in the development of new drugs. Accordingly, several reforms aimed at restoring such incentives have been implemented or advocated. This Article challenges the central argument that drug regulation and drug innovation are necessarily at odds with one another. Although intuitively appealing, the argument that drug regulation negatively affects the incentives to innovate does not fully capture the role that regulation plays in …

Contractual Expansion Of The Scope Of Patent Infringement Through Field-Of-Use Licensing, Mark R. Patterson

Faculty Scholarship

Patentees sometimes license their inventions through field-of-use licenses, which permit licensees to use the inventions, but only in specified ways. Field-of-use licensing is often procompetitive, because the ability to provide different licensing terms for different users can encourage broader licensing of inventions. But in recent United States cases, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals and lower courts have upheld field-of-use licenses prohibiting activities that licensees would otherwise have been permitted by patent law, such as the repair and resale of patented products. The recent cases rely on the Federal Circuit's decision in Mallinckrodt, Inc. v. Medipart, Inc., where the court …