How Can the Supreme Court Not “Understand” Patent Law?
نویسنده
چکیده
The Supreme Court does understand patent law. This invited Essay responds to Federal Circuit Judge Dyk’s remarks at the Chicago-Kent Supreme Court IP Review, in particular, his observation that the patent “bar and the academy have expressed skepticism that the Supreme Court understands patent law well enough to make the governing rules” (a view Judge Dyk did not endorse). The idea that the Supreme Court does not understand the law of patents is implausible. Even more generous interpretations of this criticism – that the Supreme Court insufficiently understands innovation policy, insufficiently understands the patent system that Congress desired in creating the Federal Circuit, or insufficiently understands the technical facts to resolve patent issues – do not hold up under closer scrutiny. Rather, those leveling this charge against the Supreme Court are mistaking policy disagreement for a lack of understanding. This mistake, even if one primarily of rhetoric, has potentially negative consequences for understanding the role of patent law, promoting productive debates about patent law and policy, and preserving the Supreme Court’s legitimacy in patent law and patent law’s (perhaps limited) contribution to the constraints imposed by legal authority in our society. * Assistant Professor of Law, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. Thanks for Jonathan Jianu for research assistance. Thanks to Paul Gugliuzza, Josh Sarnoff, and Ted Sichelman for helpful comments and criticisms. 2017 HOW CAN THE SUPREME COURT NOT “UNDERSTAND” PATENT LAW? 293
منابع مشابه
PATENTLY NON-OBVIOUS II: EXPERIMENTAL STUDY ON THE HINDSIGHT ISSUE BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT IN KSR v. TELEFLEX
For the first time in thirty years, the Supreme Court will consider the core patent requirement that an invention be non-obvious. At the heart of the case lies the challenge of how to insulate non-obvious decisions from the distortion of the hindsight bias. This Article reports the latest empirical studies in a line of hindsight research, which present experimental data bearing directly on the ...
متن کاملبررسی سیر تحول در ثبت اختراعات مرتبط با دی.اِن.اِی با تأکید بر رأی دیوان عالی آمریکا در قضیه انجمن پاتولوژی مولکولی علیه شرکت میریاد
Patentability of inventions related to biotechnology and genetics has been one of the most challenging issues in patent law. One of these challenges is whether patenting products in which natural components are used is correct? Can we put human genes in the ownership of certain individuals? In addition, exercising exclusive rights arising from patents will limit the access of people, in particu...
متن کاملGenerics still unable to resolve ANDA patent issues by declaratory judgment, but is a supreme court resolution on the way?
The Supreme Court recently denied certiorari to review the Federal Circuit’s ruling in Apotex v. Pfizer (S. Ct. 906-1006, October 16, 2006). The ruling was predictable. Pfizer had mooted the case by providing a covenant not to sue Apotex on its Quinapril patent. But the underlying legal issue – subject matter jurisdiction in declaratory judgment cases – is currently pending before the Supreme C...
متن کاملWhy the Supreme Court Was Correct to Deny Certiorari in Ftc
In November 2008, the Federal Trade Commission petitioned the Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit’s decision in FTC v. Rambus. That decision reversed the Commission’s finding that Rambus knowingly failed to disclose a patent to a standard setting organization and, in so doing, acquired monopoly power in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. In February 2009, the Supreme Court denied t...
متن کامل