KSR v. Teleflex and the Obviousness Standard
3.9.07 •Over 35 groups have submitted amicus briefs in the KSR v. Teleflex case, which has become a battleground over the obviousness standards applied to patents in U.S. courts. What standard is best?
Opinion-of-Counsel Defense to Inducement
1.28.07 •On December 13, 2006, in DSU Medical Corp. v. JMS Co., 04-1620, 05-1048, -1052 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 13, 2006), the en banc Federal Circuit resolved “conflicting precedent” and unambiguously announced that liability under 35 U.S.C. §271(b) for inducement requires a “specific intent to infringe,” and not merely an intent to induce the acts that are later charged with infringement.
The Rise of Extraterritoriality in US Patent Law Under 35 USC 271(f)
11.5.06 •Prior to 1984, liability for patent infringement under the “make” provision of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) could only be found if a patented invention was made entirely within the United States. The United States Supreme Court made this abundantly clear in Deepsouth Packing Co. v. Laitram Corp., in which it held that Deepsouth could not be held liable under United States patent law for exporting components that were then assembled overseas. Thus, Congress enacted 35 U.S.C. § 271(f) as part of the “Patent Law Amendments Act of 1984″ to close this “loophole” in U.S. patent law. In recent cases, liability under 271(f) has been extended to manufacturers of software.
eBay Inc. v. MercExchange: Copyright’s Promise for Patent Injunctions
11.5.06 •In eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 126 S. Ct. 1837 (2006), the United States Supreme Court affirmed the application to patent law of the traditional four factors a plaintiff must show when seeking an injunction, overruling the Federal Circuit’s practice of awarding such injunctions in all but exceptional circumstances. The Supreme Court suggested that its decision harmonized patent law with the approach taken in copyright law. This article examines copyright jurisprudence to determine what effect the application of that approach would have on requests for patent injunctions.
The Patent System: Victims and Victors
9.30.06 •June Lipton, the General Counsel of Interact, a public software company with a fifty million dollar market cap, faces another decision about whether to settle a patent lawsuit or litigate. Her company is fighting several patent litigation suits at the sum of a few millions dollars a year (attorney costs only) and has recently joined an industry group to support their efforts to lobby Congress and persuade the Supreme Court that wholesale changes in the patent system are critical to its survival.