As anyone who follows the United States Supreme Court knows, the Court has historically been extremely fond of taking important cases with cutting edge issues, only to dodge the real issues and address some insignificant procedural or hyper-technical issue. Such disappointment is all too frequent, so Supreme Court watchers are seldom surprised when the Court passes on an opportunity to breathe clarity into otherwise unsettled waters. But what the Supreme Court did in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange LLC, 547 U.S. 388 (2006) was far more disappointing. In eBay, the Supreme Court decided to throw out longstanding and well-established Federal Circuit jurisprudence and offered little or nothing in its place. The result has been an extraordinary shift in the balance of power between patent owners and infringers.
Patent
- Enablement
- Fee Shifting
- Litigation
- International Approaches to Accelerating Innovation and Access in the Pandemic
- Defensive Publications: A Cost-Effective Tool to Supplement Your Patent Strategy
- A Stylized Word Mark in One Country May Be Too Simple and Common in Another
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, May 22: Copyright Office Issues Section 512 Safe Harbor Report, CAFC Denies Review of PTAB Institution Decision and Director Iancu on Possible Filing Deadline Extension
- CAFC Finds Claim for Delivery Notification System Abstract as Directed to a Longstanding Commercial Practice
Recent Posts
- International Approaches to Accelerating Innovation and Access in the Pandemic
- Defensive Publications: A Cost-Effective Tool to Supplement Your Patent Strategy
- A Stylized Word Mark in One Country May Be Too Simple and Common in Another
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, May 22: Copyright Office Issues Section 512 Safe Harbor Report, CAFC Denies Review of PTAB Institution Decision and Director Iancu on Possible Filing Deadline Extension
- CAFC Finds Claim for Delivery Notification System Abstract as Directed to a Longstanding Commercial Practice