About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Court Report | Main | Patent Public Advisory Committee to Meet on Wednesday, March 3, 2010 »

March 01, 2010

Comments

Better yet, use a procedure of special masters and court-appointed experts to give informed and technically correct constructions at the trial level that is efficient and provides a complete record on appeal. The CAFC need not give deference to the District Court's ruling, but having a better record will minimize negative consequences from Cybor.

Kevin,

Nice piece. Unless a miracle happens (or God forbid, SCOTUS gets involved), nothing is going to rid Federal Circuit jurisprudence of the Cybor "claim construction is an issue of law for us to decide de novo" rule.

Dear Lawrence:

It would be interesting to do a study looking at the results on appeal for judges that use special masters (used to be a common practice in Boston, for example) compared with those who don't. As much as I'd like to think that better informed judges would do a "better" job (as defined by the Federal Circuit), I'm not sure. It also might be interesting to look at instances where the Federal Circuit affirmed the lower court (as here or in the Amgen v. HMR case a few years ago) and see how the district court judge performed the task - I know the judge in the Amgen case was very thorough in his analysis.

Thanks for the comment.

The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30