Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Post-<i>Phillips</i>: Will The Trial Courts Receive More Deference in Patent Cases?
The most important question in every patent case is “what do the claims mean?” The district court answers this question in its claim construction ruling. Presently, every aspect of a district court's claim construction is reviewed de novo by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
The de novo standard of review does not require the Federal Circuit to give any deference to the district court's reasoning or conclusions. Notwithstanding statements by several Federal Circuit judges that the district court's analysis is taken into account, the lack of a higher standard of review seems to encourage the losing party to file an appeal. After all, why not take a mulligan on the issue and try again with a panel of three new judges?
The problem of de novo review is tied to the nature of patent claims themselves. Patent claims, the series of numbered paragraphs at the conclusion of the patent, define the scope of the patent owner's rights. Yet, because of the technical nature of inventions, the determination of the scope of rights is not easily made. Words have different meanings under different conditions. To a civil engineer, a “drain” is a channel that carries away surface water; to an electrical engineer, it is a region in a field-effect transistor into which electrons flow; to others, it is the hole at the bottom of the sink.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
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.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?