Brief of 44 Law, Economics and Business Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in Impression Products, Inc. V. Lexmark International, Inc

Brief of 44 Law, Economics and Business Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in Impression Products, Inc. V. Lexmark International, Inc PDF Author: Jonathan Barnett
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 48

Get Book Here

Book Description
Patent transactions are a key component of technology markets, enabling patent owners and other firms to efficiently commercialize new technologies on the costly and risky path from “lab” to “market.” Mandatory patent exhaustion without the possibility of contractual waiver or modification substantially limits the range of possible transactions by precluding the enforcement via patent infringement actions of downstream restrictions relating to sales of patented products. Although mandatory patent exhaustion can mitigate problems of notice and related transaction costs, its categorical approach substantially reduces the static and dynamic benefits -- including to consumers -- of customized patent transactions. Instead, we support a presumptive approach to patent exhaustion, which allows contractual opt-out when clear notice is provided of a downstream limitation that is otherwise lawful. Such a rule best promotes the invention and commercialization goals of patent law and also is more consistent with the body of prior Supreme Court opinions. Thus, presumptive exhaustion should apply to domestic sales of patented products. Additionally, we argue that while there is little legal basis for exhaustion in the context of foreign sales, should the Supreme Court adopt an international exhaustion doctrine, it should be presumptive for similar reasons.

Brief of 44 Law, Economics and Business Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in Impression Products, Inc. V. Lexmark International, Inc

Brief of 44 Law, Economics and Business Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in Impression Products, Inc. V. Lexmark International, Inc PDF Author: Jonathan Barnett
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 48

Get Book Here

Book Description
Patent transactions are a key component of technology markets, enabling patent owners and other firms to efficiently commercialize new technologies on the costly and risky path from “lab” to “market.” Mandatory patent exhaustion without the possibility of contractual waiver or modification substantially limits the range of possible transactions by precluding the enforcement via patent infringement actions of downstream restrictions relating to sales of patented products. Although mandatory patent exhaustion can mitigate problems of notice and related transaction costs, its categorical approach substantially reduces the static and dynamic benefits -- including to consumers -- of customized patent transactions. Instead, we support a presumptive approach to patent exhaustion, which allows contractual opt-out when clear notice is provided of a downstream limitation that is otherwise lawful. Such a rule best promotes the invention and commercialization goals of patent law and also is more consistent with the body of prior Supreme Court opinions. Thus, presumptive exhaustion should apply to domestic sales of patented products. Additionally, we argue that while there is little legal basis for exhaustion in the context of foreign sales, should the Supreme Court adopt an international exhaustion doctrine, it should be presumptive for similar reasons.

Brief of 22 Law, Economics, and Business Professors As Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in TC Heartland V. Kraft Foods

Brief of 22 Law, Economics, and Business Professors As Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent in TC Heartland V. Kraft Foods PDF Author: Ted M. Sichelman
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 0

Get Book Here

Book Description
TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods, currently pending at the U.S Supreme Court, concerns where patent owners can file suit against corporate defendants. This amicus brief considers and analyzes the policy issues at stake in this case. It concludes that the current venue rule, which allows patent owners to sue corporate defendants in any district in which personal jurisdiction lies, should be retained. First, rigorous empirical analysis shows that limiting venue in the manner proposed by the Petitioner in this case would not have any meaningful effect on the existing concentration of patent cases among the lower courts. Instead, it would primarily shift patent cases from one jurisdiction that is relatively favorable to patent owners to two jurisdictions that are relatively less favorable. Second, Congress has effectively rejected concerns over “forum shopping” and “forum selling” in adopting a statutory venue rule that corporate defendants in nearly every type of federal civil case may be sued anywhere personal jurisdiction lies. This rule is sensible, because corporate defendants should be subject to suit where they have committed substantial harmful acts. There is no reliable, systematic evidence to show that “forum shopping” or “forum selling” in patent law is exceptional when compared to other areas of law so as to justify a special venue rule. Third, even if patent suits were exceptional, only Congress is in a position to craft a rule that meaningfully distributes cases among the various district courts and that is equitable to patent owners and accused infringers alike.

Brief of Amici Curiae 56 Professors of Law and Economics in Support of Petition for Writ of Certiorari in TC Heartland LLC V. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341

Brief of Amici Curiae 56 Professors of Law and Economics in Support of Petition for Writ of Certiorari in TC Heartland LLC V. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341 PDF Author: Colleen V. Chien
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 24

Get Book Here

Book Description
28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) provides that a defendant in a patent case may be sued where the defendant is incorporated or has a regular and established place of business and has infringed the patent. This Court made clear in Fourco Glass Co. v. Transmirra Prods. Corp., 353 U.S. 222, 223 (1957), that those were the only permissible venues for a patent case. But the Federal Circuit has rejected Fourco and the plain meaning of § 1400(b), instead permitting a patent plaintiff to file suit against a defendant anywhere there is personal jurisdiction over that defendant. The result has been rampant forum shopping, particularly by patent trolls. 44% of 2015 patent lawsuits were filed in a single district: the Eastern District of Texas, a forum with plaintiff-friendly rules and practices, and where few of the defendants are incorporated or have established places of business. And an estimated 86% of 2015 patent cases were filed somewhere other than the jurisdictions specified in the statute. Colleen V. Chien & Michael Risch, Recalibrating Patent Venue, Santa Clara Univ. Legal Studies Research Paper No. 10-1 (Sept. 1, 2016), Table 3. This Court should grant certiorari to review the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) because the Federal Circuit's dubious interpretation of the statute plays an outsized and detrimental role, both legally and economically, in the patent system.

Brief of Twenty-eight Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner

Brief of Twenty-eight Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner PDF Author: Adam Mossoff
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Patent infringement
Languages : en
Pages : 19

Get Book Here

Book Description


Brief of Former Article III Judges and Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent

Brief of Former Article III Judges and Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent PDF Author: Stephen I. Vladeck
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Appellate procedure
Languages : en
Pages : 31

Get Book Here

Book Description


Brief Amici Curiae on Behalf of 70 Law, Economics, and Business Professors and the American Antitrust Institute in Support of Appellants

Brief Amici Curiae on Behalf of 70 Law, Economics, and Business Professors and the American Antitrust Institute in Support of Appellants PDF Author: Michael A. Carrier
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 45

Get Book Here

Book Description
In FTC v. Actavis, the Su ...

Brief of Amicus Curiae Complex Litigation Law Professors in Support of Respondents

Brief of Amicus Curiae Complex Litigation Law Professors in Support of Respondents PDF Author: Sergio J. Campos
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 26

Get Book Here

Book Description
This brief addresses the first question presented in Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, No. 14-1146, which concerns the use of statistical techniques in class actions. The brief informs the Supreme Court of the appropriate uses of statistics and other inferential proof in class actions. It also shows that statistical techniques can be used by courts while allowing a defendant to assert individual defenses. Courts can do so by utilizing bifurcation or similar trial practices.

Brief of Amicus Curiae of Law Professors in Support of Respondent Affluere Investments, Inc

Brief of Amicus Curiae of Law Professors in Support of Respondent Affluere Investments, Inc PDF Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 0

Get Book Here

Book Description


Microsoft Corporation, Petitioner V. AT&T Corporation, Respondent

Microsoft Corporation, Petitioner V. AT&T Corporation, Respondent PDF Author: Microsoft Corporation
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category : Patent infringement
Languages : en
Pages : 52

Get Book Here

Book Description


Brief of Amici Curiae Professors of Administrative Law, Federal Courts, and Intellectual Property Law in Support of Respondent

Brief of Amici Curiae Professors of Administrative Law, Federal Courts, and Intellectual Property Law in Support of Respondent PDF Author:
Publisher:
ISBN:
Category :
Languages : en
Pages : 0

Get Book Here

Book Description