| Date | Leader | Subject | Readings |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/06 | Morris | Introducing Ourselves | Questionnaire; How the Seminar Will Work |
| Hot OLD Case: Winans v. Denmead | Winans v. Denmead; Winans' Patent (link to USPTO site and click on "images" - if you have installed TIFF or (link to pdf file on the course website); Patent Act of 1836 | ||
| 09/13 | Morris | More Early History of the DOE | Sarnoff , JPTOS article, concerning the years 1790-1870 |
| More History concerning Judicial Generosity to Inventors: Another Hot OLD Case, also from 1853 | O'Reilly v. Morse ; and the Morse reissue patent in suit, along with the original Morse patent patent | ||
| 09/20 | Iseki Prof. of Law Japan |
Employee/Employer Rights in the US and Japan | Link to Prof. Iseki's Readings |
| John Posa Gifford, Krass Ann Arbor |
LED technology in Japan, pre-Nakamura; patent prosecution tips; etc. | ||
| Morris | Other Issues for US Employee/Consultant-Inventors(s) | A case with a variety of unusual issues: Regents of U of NM v. Knight | |
| 09/27 | Morris | Constitutional Law (and Federal Courts and Jurisdiction) meet Patent Law |
Eleventh Amendment:
Regents v. UNM Seventh Amendment: Tech. License Whose Precedent: Regents (again) and Lab Corp. v. Chiron Writs of Mandamus v. Appeal: Tech. License, again, and Lab Corp. v. Chiron, again |
| 10/04 |
NO CLASS (Law School follows Monday schedule) | ||
| 10/11 | Kendra Mattison '01 Finnegan, Henderson, DC |
Biotechnology Patenting |
Finnegan Henderson's Biotechnology Innovation Report
:
Trends in patenting (pp. 4-7 = pdf pages 8 and 9); Trends in ownership (pp.20-25 = pdf pages 16-18); Brief overview of the CREATE Act (pp. 31-33 = pdf pages 21-22); Trends in litigation (pp.50-53 = pdf pages 31-32, and 66-87 = pdf pages 39-47, and skim the tables at pdf pages 48-49). Summary of Merck v. Integra |
Ted Olds and Tony Cho '92 Carlson, Gaskey & Olds Birmingham, MI |
Markman Hearings, in the District Court and on Appeal | Research Plastics v. Federal Packaging: Opinion; Patent Figures |
| 10/18 |
Frostick | Patenting Plants: The Peculiar Rules for Novelty and Enablement | Frostick Packet
(includes original cover sheet) and
viewable replacement cover sheet:
The Plant Patent Act, In re Le Grice and Elsner |
| Morris | Patent Statistics You Can Create Using RISC Architecture | RJMorris, May 2001 IP Today article, Some Data about Patents in Class 705 [final proof copy] ; (Also: what I mean by RISC Architecture.) | |
| The WTO (although not TRIPS) | Hear not read: attend the Thursday talk in Room 120 at 4:00 concerning the WTO. Click here for more information from the law school's Docket. | ||
| 10/25 |
Cohen | Policing Obvious Patents - Motivation to Combine versus Synergy | Cohen Packet:
Sakraida (Sup. Ct. 1976), Shaffer (CCPA 1956), Oetiker (Fed.Cir. 1992), The FTC Report, and the regional and federal circuits in the years right after Sakraida |
| Murshak | Is it Worth Patenting, and Where? | Murshak Packet | |
| 11/01 |
Kolb | Federal Circuit Jurisdiction: Has the Supreme Court made a mess of Congress' plan? | Kolb Packet:
Vornado , its predecessors, Christianson v. Colt and Aerojet and its aftermath in the state courts and regional circuits Green v. Hendricks in Indiana and Telecom and Schinzing in the 11th and 8th Circuits respectively. |
| Shui | Patent Disclosure Requirements in Statndard Setting Organizations ("SSO"'s) | Shui Packet: in MSWord and
in pdf
; also handy table
for understanding Rambus litigation history
The JEDEC Manual, Rambus v. Infineon(2003) and Prof. Lemley on IPRs v. SSOs (2002). |
|
| 11/08 |
Cleary | Enhanced Damages: Willful Infringement and the Role of Opinions of Counsel | Cleary Packet Knorr-Bremse (The famous one, and the remand) Imonex5/23/05 Union Carbide10/3/05 Handouts from Prof. Morris: |
| Heller | Patent Law Reform in the US: The First-to-File Debate |
Heller Cover Sheet and
Packet
HR 2795 (introduced 6/8/05) Testimony before Congress, Summer 2005 Other Earlier Opinions |
|
| 11/15 |
Yates | Enabling, and Avoiding Anticipation of, Genus Claims |
Yates Cover Sheet and
Packet
Tronzo v. Biomet, LizardTech, PTO's Revised Interim Guidelines for Written Description (2000) Handouts from Prof. Morris |
| Olin | Bewildered, Befuddled, and Bemused: Should Juries Decide Patent Cases? |
Olin Packet
Ross v. Bernhard's n.10; Circuit Court opinions dealing with complexity, including SRI v. Matsushita; Articles by Miron and Signore Handout from Prof. Morris: Law-Fact-Equity List |
|
| 11/22 |
Hawkins | Reexamination: A Powerful Tool For Accused Infringers Or Just Too Risky? | Hawkins Packet:
Patlex v. Mossinghoff, Ethicon v. Quigg, Middleton v. 3M (SD Iowa 2004) 35 USC Sections 301-307 (ex parte reexamination), and 311-318 (inter partes examination) From Prof. Morris:
|
| Ko | Awarding Lost Profits For "Unpatented" Products: Rite-Hite and Other Cases | Ko Packet:
The DAMMP Test from Panduit; Rite-Hite, King Instruments, Juicy Whip |
|
| 11/29 |
Edsenga | Proposed Patent Legislation: Remedies [Permanent Injunctions and Willfulness] |
Edsenga Cover Sheet
and
Packet:
35 USC 283 and 284, HR 2795, Smith v. Hughes Tool, MercExchange v. HalfCom, and Selected Testimony before Congress |
| Pearson | Construing Claims Before And After Phillips: What's Old Is New Again | Pearson Packet: in MSWord and
in pdf:
Vitronics; Texas Digital; Phillips: Timeline, Certified Questions, Selected Amicus Briefs and Patent Figures, En banc decision; Aspex (SDNY 9/9/05). |
|
| 12/6 | Morris | 101 in the Supreme Court (again; alas?): Lab Corp. v. Metabolite |
Fed.Cir. Opinion
and (first) Petition for Cert.
Link to Metabolite patent Opposition, Reply and SG Briefs |
| Debriefing/Party - Second hour of class to be held Pizza House | |||