|
Answering Service
- Patent Points -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 13
14 15
Featured Article
A
Strong Patent Is Important To Halt Infringer's Operations,
Says U.S. Supreme Court
Chemical, pharmaceutical, and
biotechnology companies and inventors spend countless number
of hours and a lot of money to come up with a drug for curing
killer diseases like cancer or diabetes or a new catalyst that
will speed up a chemical reaction towards making a wonder
plastic. They protect their inventions by securing a patent.
For one reason or another,
the patent owner may not be ready to make or sell the patented
invention. The patent owner, for example, University or
individual inventor, may be thinking of licensing the
invention to another who can market the invention, and collect
royalty payments rather than undertake efforts to secure
financing necessary to bring their works to market themselves.
However, much to the patent owner’s surprise and anger, it may
notice an infringer illegally making and selling the
invention. Can the patent owner go and automatically get an
order to halt the infringer’s operations? The answer may be
surprising. The courts are not always sympathetic to the
patent owner.
In the recently decided fight
between internet giant eBay and smaller company Mercexchange,
who owned a patent for doing business on the web, Justice
Clarence Thomas, speaking for the United States Supreme Court,
ruled that the patent owner, besides showing that the patent
has been violated, must prove that a number of things are
lining up in its favor before it can stop the infringer from
copying the patented invention. This is a dramatic departure
from the earlier lower court ruling that, except in rare
situations, a court should automatically issue an order to
halt the infringer’s operations if the patent owner proved
that his valid patent is unlawfully copied.
To succeed in halting the
operations of the infringer, the Supreme Court indicated that
the patent owner must show that it has suffered beyond repair
by the actions of the infringer; that there is no other
remedy, such as money, than stopping the infringer; how its
hardship outweighs the hardship of the infringer; and that
public interest would not be harmed by halting the infringer.
This is commonly called the “four-factor test”.
In proving that the forces
are working in the patent owner’s favor, as required by the
Supreme Court, one of the questions that would come up is how
strong the patent is – i.e., can it survive an attack on its
validity. In the words of Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing on
the eBay case, “the potential vagueness and suspect validity
of ... the patents may affect the calculus under the
four-factor test.”
Securing a strong patent is
not trivial. It is important that patent is filed promptly.
For example, if the patent is filed long after the invention
was published in a magazine or displayed as a poster, its
validity or vitality comes into question. Or the patent may
have been filed promptly but the patent may have been drafted
the patent such that the patent does not cover the invention
adequately. To succeed in stopping the infringer, or to obtain
a sizable royalty or settlement from the infringer, it is
essential that the patent is strong and robust.
Xavier Pillai, Ph.D., a Partner in the law firm of
Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. in Chicago, IL; Phone:
(312)-616-5600 or email at
xpillai@leydig.com.
I help chemical, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology
companies resist competition by securing strong patent
protection.
|
Back to
answering service
or back to Patent Points
click for top
|
|