A Conversation with Chief Judge Paul Michel
Suggested ReadingsIn Re Seagate
One of the central debates underway in patent law circles is a fight over the proper way to think about cash damages. Critical to that analysis is an understanding of how royalties are calculated in general, and under what conditions royalties can be increased due to a charge of willfulness. On the latter point, the central case today is the Federal Circuit's 2007 decision in In Re Seagate.
eBay v. MercExchange
The Supreme Court has in recent years shown an increasing interest in patent law and its doctrinal details. One of the more important decisions from this new line is this 2006 decision where the Court substantially reset the rules regarding the availability of injunctive relief.
Aligning Patent Presumptions with the Reality of Patent Review
Almost all of us who work within the patent system see room for continued and significant reform. My issue? The presumption of patent validity. As I wrote in this 2006 policy paper, the patent system today is too quick to assume that an issued patent was in fact rightly issued. Patents should instead be significantly vulnerable to challenge even long after issuance. Later in time, after all, the legal system has more information with which to work, can better harness adversarial interactions, and can focus on the small number of patents that actually turn out to matter economically.
