Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Post Mortem of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents
The Federal Circuit in Tate Access Floors, Inc. v. Interface Architectural, 279 F.3d 1357, 1368 (2002), announced the death of the Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents (RDOE). The Supreme Court created the RDOE as an equitable release valve for accused devices that literally infringe claims. The RDOE applies “where a device is so far changed in principle from a patented article that it performs the same or a similar function in a substantially different way, but nevertheless falls within the literal words of the claim.” Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. v. Linde Air Products Co., 339 U.S. 605, 608-609 (1950); see also Boyden Power-Brake Co. v. Westinghouse, 170 U.S. 537 (1898). In such a case, the RDOE “may be used to restrict the claim and defeat the patentee's action for infringement.” Graver Tank, 399 U.S. at 609.
In Tate Access, the court reasons that the RDOE is superfluous because its function was replaced, after Graver Tank, with '112 of the Patent Act. According to the court, the requirements of '112, such as written description and enablement, are “co-extensive with the broadest possible reach of the [RDOE]” because '112 prevents excessively broad claims from being valid and, especially in the case of means-plus-function claims under '112 paragraph 6, acts to reduce the scope of claims. Tate Access, 279 F.3d at 1368. As discussed below, not only are the court's reasons for the RDOE's supposed death inaccurate, they reveal how the ghost of the RDOE lives on in claim construction and how it may be stronger in death than in life.
The RDOE Is Not Co-extensive with '112
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions
UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?