Posts in US Supreme Court


It is undeniable that the major destructive force in the patent system today is the United States Supreme Court. Indeed, over the last several years, the Supreme Court has become extremely active in the area of patent law. They …

Continue Reading

Simply stated, any patent decision from the Supreme Court that cites stare decisis lacks all intellectual credibility given how arbitrarily and capriciously they have ignored their patent own precedent and the patent statutes over the past decade. Obviously, this …

Continue Reading

While some companies continue to wait and see, we saw a dramatic shift in late 2014. The most sophisticated companies on IP matters used the uncertainty to their advantage. They hypothesized the market couldn’t get much worse, and since …

Continue Reading

The idea that the Supreme Court is at all capable of understanding — let alone deciding — issues of a technical nature is ridiculous. Yet their individual and collective lack of knowledge hasn't prevented them from reaching misguided decisions in a …

Continue Reading

In both theories of indirect patent infringement (i.e., inducement of patent infringement and contributory infringement), the patent owner must show that the defendant knew its activities were infringing. If the defendant can prove that it did not have …

Continue Reading

The issue considered by the Supreme Court was whether a good faith belief of patent invalidity is a defense to a claim of induced infringement. In a 6-2 decision written by Justice Kennedy, the Supreme Court ruled that belief …

Continue Reading

There was a split in the circuit courts as to what effect a TTAB decision will have, and this depends heavily upon where the litigation is happening. The weight of a TTAB decision will vary depending on the jurisdiction, …

Continue Reading

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has had a very long love affair with de novo review, a standard whereby the reviewing appellate court can simply do whatever they want without giving any deference to …

Continue Reading

Truthfully, the Supreme Court decision in Alice can only be described as an intellectually bankrupt. The Supreme Court never once used the word “software” in its decision. The failure to mention software a single time is breathtaking given that …

Continue Reading

The Supreme Court held that the machine-or-transformation test is not the sole test for patent eligibility under §101, and that the Federal Circuit erred when it ruled that it was the singular test to determine whether an invention is patentable …

Continue Reading

The unfortunate reality is the United States is no longer the most favorable jurisdiction for innovators. There has been a full assault on patent rights that started at least as early as 2005. Ever since we have seen proposed legislative …

Continue Reading

Our Judicial Mount Olympus pays, at best, lip-service to Chakrabarty’s observation that, in enacting 35 U.S.C. § 101 in 1952, Congress chose the statutory classes (in Chakrabarty, referring specifically to “composition” and “manufacture” but which would be equally applicable to “…

Continue Reading