Patents

Supreme Court Weighs in on Patents, Antitrust and Market Power

March 20, 2006

Patents, Antitrust. Suppose that you live in a small farming community, Village 1, that relies entirely on its own members for food supplies. I have the only farm that grows corn. Whenever you come to me to purchase corn I tell you that I will only sell you my corn if you also buy a pound of cauliflower for every pound of corn you purchase. Cauliflower is plentiful, and you don’t want to buy my cauliflower (in fact you don’t even like this vegetable), but since you (and your fellow citizens) need corn you have no choice. Assume that you move to a new community, Village 2. You still need corn, but you discover that there are several purveyors of corn in your new town. You go to the closest of these, and you discover, to your dismay, that this farmer also insists that if you buy his corn, you must also buy his cauliflower. Before purchasing you check around, and learn that the other corn vendors do not require that you purchase cauliflower as a condition to purchasing corn, and you happily proceed to do business only with them in the future. You later learn, to your satisfaction, that the corn farmer that you first encountered in Village 2 has gone out of business. Thie simple example illustrates one of the more complex and vexing doctrines of U.S. antitrust…

Read the full article →

Submarines Sunk, Again

September 15, 2005

Patents. David Jacobs contributes the following post: Is this the end of an era in patent law? Or just the dropping of the other shoe? Last week in Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Lemelson Medical, Education and Research Foundation, LP, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (practically the court of last resort in patent matters, since the Supreme Court rarely takes a patent case) ruled that a number of machine vision patents of inventor Jerome Lemelson were unenforceable due to the patentee’s “unreasonable delay” in prosecuting the underlying patent applications before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The ruling comes too late for various companies who had already paid millions of dollars to license these patents from Lemelson. Read full post …

Read the full article →

"Dictionaries First, Dictionaries Second, Never Dictionaries"

July 20, 2005

Patents. What should the federal courts look at first in construing the terms used in a patent, the patent specification contained in the patent itself, dictionaries or treatises? If this seems like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, you’re right, but in the cloistered word of patent lawyers and judges, the answer to this question can mean the difference between failure and success. This was the issue addressed by the Federal Circuit (which handles all patent appeals in the U.S.) in the July 12, 2005 decision in Phillips v. AWH Corp. My colleagues David Jacobs and Joe Laferrera have written a short client advisory discussing this case. Read the Client Advisory here Read the decision here

Read the full article →