Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
What rights does an employer have in an employee's patent? The short answer is, it depends. The employer may have a right of assignment ' that is, a right to outright ownership of the patent. Another possibility is a so-called 'shop right,' in which the employee owns the patent, but the employer has a non-exclusive, non-transferable license to use the invention in its business. There is also a distinct possibility that the employer has no rights whatsoever in the patent.
Often, when an employee is hired for a position that may entail inventive work ' such as tasks completed as an engineer or research scientist ' the employment agreement includes a clause relating to assignment of inventions. Typically, the employee agrees to assign to his employer all inventions that he develops during his employment that relate to his work, or, more broadly, to the employer's business. Agreements of this kind are typically enforceable. 'The right of an employer to contract for patentable discoveries made by its employees within certain limits is well recognized.' Guth v. Minnesota Mining and Mfg., 72 F.2d 385, 387 (7th Cir. 1934). However, terms of an agreement that are overreaching are not enforceable. For example, a term that requires assignment of an invention conceived after the inventor is no longer an employee may not be enforceable. Id. at 388-89. As another example, if a former employee develops improvements on patented inventions that he had assigned to his former employer, the latter may have no rights in any patents on the improvements. Crites v. Radtke, 28 F.Supp. 282 (S.D.N.Y. 1939).
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
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
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.