Patent Law, Spring 2010, Course Coverage Table
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
          
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Introduction  | 
          1-2  | 
          Tues., 
          Jan. 19  | 
          All  | 
        ||
|   Foundations - Bonito 
              Boats v. Thunder Craft (1989)  | 
          3-8  | 
          ||||
|   Origins - In re 
              Bergy (CCPA 1979)  | 
          9-11  | 
          ||||
|   Patent History and Development  | 
          12-19  | 
          ||||
|   Forms of Patent Protection  | 
          19-20  | 
          ||||
|   Forms of Patent Protection (continued)  | 
          25-26  | 
          ||||
|   Nature and Function of the Patent System  | 
          27-40  | 
          ||||
|   Example patent (US Pat. No. 5,190,351)  | 
          21-24  | 
          Review this patent in detail; trace the claim 
              language to the specification's disclosure and to the components 
              shown in the drawings; what is the gist of the inventive concept?  | 
          Thurs., 
          Jan. 21  | 
          All  | 
        |
More on wheelbarrows: overview;              design 
          document  | 
          |||||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
          
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Patent Eligibility  | 
            58-59  | 
            Tues., 
            Jan 26  | 
            L  | 
          ||
Diamond v. Chakrabarty 
                (1980)   | 
            59-69  | 
            ||||
Lab Corp v. Metabolite 
                (2006)   | 
            69-76  | 
            ||||
Computer related inventions and business 
                methods - Gottschalk v. Benson (1972)  | 
            76-80  | 
             Example patent with method and structure 
                claims: 4,079,239  | 
            |||
Diamond v. Diehr 
                (1981)   | 
            80-86  | 
            Thurs., 
            Jan. 28  | 
            L  | 
          ||
State St. Bank 
                v. Signature (Fed. Cir. 1998)  | 
            86-87  | 
            US Pat. No. 5,193,056  | 
            |||
AT&T v. Excel 
                (Fed. Cir. 1999)  | 
            87-88  | 
            ||||
In re Bilski (Fed. 
                Cir. 2008) (en banc)  | 
            88-122  | 
            Fri., 
            Jan. 29  | 
            L  | 
          ||
122-122  | 
          think about these, they will be reviewed 
              in class  | 
          Tues., 
          Feb. 2  | 
          R  | 
        ||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
          
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Utility - Lowell 
                v. Lewis (Dist. Mass. 1817)  | 
            123-125  | 
            ||||
n/a  | 
            |||||
Juicy Whip v. 
                Orange Bang (Fed. Cir. 1999)  | 
            126-131  | 
            US Pat. No. 5,574,405  | 
            |||
Brenner v. Manson 
                (1966)   | 
            132-140  | 
            Thurs., 
            Feb. 4  | 
            R  | 
          ||
In re Fisher (Fed. 
                Cir. 2005)  | 
            140-154  | 
            ||||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
          
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Anticipation - Titanium 
                Metals Corp v. Banner (Fed. Cir. 1985)  | 
            155-166  | 
            Tues., 
            Feb. 9  | 
            L  | 
          ||
Inherency - Continental 
                Can v. Monsanto (Fed. Cir. 1991)  | 
            n/a  | 
             To be discussed by Vetter from the overheads; 
                US Pat. No. 4,108,324 
                  | 
            |||
Schering Corp. 
                v. Geneva Pharms. (Fed. Cir. 2003)  | 
            166-178  | 
            ||||
Anticipation Exercise  | 
            178-179  | 
            think about but do not externally research 
                the exercise; replace "DDS Catalog" in the last paragraph with "Fiendish Flouridators"  | 
            Thurs., 
            Feb. 11  | 
            L  | 
          |
Statutory Bars - Public Use - Egbert 
                v. Lippmann (1881)  | 
            179-188  | 
            ||||
Metallizing Engr. 
                v Kenyon Bearing (2d 1946)  | 
            188-193  | 
            ||||
City of Elizabeth 
                v. Pavement Co. (1877)  | 
            193-200  | 
            ||||
On Sale Bar - Pfaff 
                v. Wells (1998)  | 
            200-209  | 
             US Pat. No. 4,491,377 
                | 
            Tues., 
            Feb. 16  | 
            R  | 
          |
§102(b) - Electric 
                Storage Battery v. Shimadzu (1939)  | 
            210-211  | 
            ||||
§102(b) - Abbot 
                Labs v. Geneva (Fed. Cir. 1999)  | 
            211-216  | 
            ||||
§102(b) - W.L. 
                Gore v. Garlock (Fed. Cir. 1983)  | 
            216-220  | 
            ||||
§102(c) - Abandonment  | 
            220-221  | 
            ||||
§102(d) - Delayed US Filing  | 
            221-223  | 
            ||||
223-224  | 
            think about but do not externally research 
                the exercises.  | 
            ||||
Novelty - §102(a) - Prior Invention 
                - Woodcock v. Parker (Dist. Ma. 1813)  | 
            225-227  | 
            Thurs., 
            Feb. 18  | 
            R  | 
          ||
Gillman v. Stern 
                (2d 1940)  | 
            227-231  | 
            ||||
Antedating a Reference  | 
            231-232  | 
            ||||
§102(g)  | 
            233-237  | 
            ||||
Conception - Oka 
                v. Youssefyeh (Fed. Cir. 1988)  | 
            237-241  | 
            Tues., 
            Feb. 23  | 
            L  | 
          ||
Reduction to Practice - Scott 
                v. Finney (Fed. Cir. 1994)  | 
            241-249  | 
            ||||
Diligence - Gould 
                v. Schawlow (CCPA 1966)  | 
            249-257  | 
            ||||
Corroboration - Woodland 
                v. Flowertree (Fed. Cir. 1998)  | 
            257-264  | 
            ||||
Award to the Second Inventor - Apotex 
                v. Merck (Fed. Cir. 2001)  | 
            264-273  | 
            ||||
Special Class Session 
               | 
            Class session this evening will be held 
                by attendance at this lecture: http://www.law.uh.edu/ipil/springlecture.html  | 
            Thurs., Feb. 25  | 
            n/a  | 
          ||
§102(e) - Disclosure in US Patents 
                - Alexander Milburn v. Bournonville (1926)  | 
            273-277  | 
            Fri., 
            Feb. 26  | 
            L  | 
          ||
§102(f) - Derivation - Agawam 
                Woolen v. Jordan (1868)  | 
            277-282  | 
            ||||
First to file versus first to invent  | 
            282-284  | 
            ||||
284-285  | 
            think about but do not externally research the 
                  exercises;  | 
            ||||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
        
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Obviousness  | 
          286-289  | 
          Tues., 
          Mar. 2  | 
          R  | 
        ||
Hotchkiss v. Greenwood 
              (1850)   | 
          289-294  | 
          ||||
Great A. & P. 
              Tea v. Supermarket Eqpt. (1950)  | 
          294-297  | 
          ||||
Graham v. John Deere 
              (1966)   | 
          298-308  | 
          ||||
KSR Intl. v. Teleflex 
              (2007)   | 
          308-326  | 
          Thurs., 
          Mar. 4  | 
          R  | 
        ||
In re Translogic 
              Tech. (Fed. Cir. 2007)   | 
          327-334  | 
          ||||
Objective Tests - Ormco 
              v. Align Tech. (Fed. Cir. 2006)  | 
          334-348  | 
          Tues., 
          Mar. 9  | 
          L  | 
        ||
Prior Art for Nonobviousness  | 
          369-370  | 
          ||||
Prior art under Sec. 102 - In 
              re Foster (CCPA 1965)  | 
          370-375  | 
          ||||
Analogous Art - In 
              re Clay (Fed. Cir. 1992)  | 
          375-381  | 
          ||||
Nonobviousness Exercise  | 
          381-385  | 
          think about but do not externally research 
              the exercise  | 
          |||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
          
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Enablement - Gould 
              v. Hellwarth (CCPA 1973)  | 
          386-398  | 
          Thurs., 
          Mar. 11  | 
          L  | 
        ||
Atlas Powder v. 
              Dupont (Fed. Cir. 1984)  | 
          398-402  | 
          Annotated US Pat. No. 3,447,978  | 
          |||
In re Wright (Fed. 
              Cir. 1993)  | 
          402-409  | 
          ||||
Wands Factors - Pharma 
              Resources v. Roxane Labs. (Fed. Cir. 2007)  | 
          409-415  | 
          US Pat. No. 6,593,318  | 
          Tues., 
          Mar. 23  | 
          R  | 
        |
Written Description (new matter) - Vas-Cath 
              v. Mahurkar (Fed. Cir. 1991)  | 
          415-426  | 
          ||||
Gentry Gallery v. 
              Berkline Corp. (Fed. Cir. 1998)  | 
          426-431  | 
          ||||
Univ. of California 
              v. Eli Lilly (Fed. Cir. 1997)  | 
          431-437  | 
          Tues., 
          Mar. 30  | 
          R  | 
        ||
|   Written Description Controversy 
              - Enzo v. Gen-Probe (Fed. Cir. 2002) (discussions 
              concerning the court's decision not to hear the case en banc)  | 
          437-445  | 
          ||||
Written Description Controversy Resolved! 
              - Ariad 
              Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly (Fed. Cir. 2010)  | 
          4-41 (.pdf pgs.)  | 
          read only the majority opinion  | 
          |||
Best Mode - Chemcast 
              v. Arco (Fed. Cir. 1990)  | 
          445-457  | 
          Thurs., 
          Apr. 1  | 
          R  | 
        ||
Objective Disclosure Exercise  | 
          458  | 
          think about but do not externally research 
              the exercise  | 
          |||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
        
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Claims - Ex parte 
              Fressola (BPAI 1993)  | 
          459-468  | 
          ||||
Format - Preamble - Catalina 
              Mktg. Int’l v. Coolsavings.com (Fed. Cir. 2002)  | 
          468-475  | 
          Tues., 
          Apr. 6  | 
          L  | 
        ||
Claims - transition and body  | 
          475-478  | 
          ||||
Claims - product by process - Atlantic 
              Thermoplastics v. Faytex (Fed. Cir. 1992)  | 
          479-487  | 
          ||||
Al-Site Corp. v. 
              VSI Int’l, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 1999)  | 
          487-500  | 
          Tues., 
          Apr. 13  | 
          L  | 
        ||
Aristocrat v. Intl Gaming Technology (Fed. 
              Cir. 2008)  | 
          501-509  | 
          ||||
 Jepson Claims  | 
          509-510  | 
          ||||
|   Markush Claims  | 
          510-511  | 
          ||||
Definiteness - Orthokinetics 
              v. Safety Travel Chairs (Fed. Cir. 1986)  | 
          511-517  | 
          ||||
Datamize v. Plumtree 
              (Fed. Cir. 2005)  | 
          517-527  | 
          ||||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
        
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Autogiro v. US (Ct. 
              Cl. 1967)  | 
          649-654  | 
          ||||
Literal - Markman 
              v. Westview Instruments (1996)  | 
          654-665  | 
          Thurs., 
          Apr. 15  | 
          L  | 
        ||
Cybor Corp. v. FAS 
              Tech. (Fed. Cir. 1998)  | 
          665-674  | 
          ||||
Phillips v. AWH 
              Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2005)  | 
          674-690  | 
          ||||
Computer Docking 
              v. Dell (Fed. Cir. 2008)  | 
          690-697  | 
          US Pat. No. 5,187,645  | 
          Tues., 
          Apr. 20  | 
          R  | 
        |
DOE - Graver Tank 
              v. Linde Air Products (1950)  | 
          697-702  | 
          ||||
Warner-Jenkinson 
              v. Hilton Davis (1997)  | 
          702-714  | 
          ||||
Limitations on the DOE - All Elements 
              - Corning Glass v. Sumitomo (Fed. Cir. 1989)  | 
          714-720  | 
          Thurs., 
          Apr. 22  | 
          R  | 
        ||
PHE - Festo v. Shoketsu 
              (2002)  | 
          721-731  | 
          ||||
Festo 
              on remand at the Federal Circuit  | 
          n/a  | 
          read only the majority opinion, pages 4-23 
              in the PDF file  | 
          |||
Dedication - Johnson 
              & Johnston v. R.E. Service (Fed. Cir. 2002)  | 
          731-739  | 
          Tues., 
          Apr. 27  | 
          R  | 
        ||
Prior Art - Wilson 
              v. David Goeffrey & Assoc. (Fed. Cir. 1990)  | 
          740-742  | 
          ||||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
        
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Prosecution  | 
          530-542  | 
          ||||
Inventorship - Ethicon 
              v. US Surgical (Fed. Cir. 1990)  | 
          544-558  | 
          ||||
Inequitable Conduct - Duty of Disclosure  | 
          558-558  | 
          Thurs., 
          Apr. 29  | 
          L  | 
        ||
Intent - Kingsdown 
              v. Hollister (Fed. Cir. 1988)  | 
          558-567  | 
          ||||
Materiality - Aventis 
              v. Amphastar (Fed. Cir. 2008)  | 
          568-587  | 
          ||||
| NOTE: coverage for the Spring 2010 course ends here | |||||
Double Patenting - In 
              re Vogel (CCPA 1970)  | 
          588-595  | 
          ||||
Post-Grant Procedures  | 
          608-609  | 
          ||||
Reissue - HP v. 
              Bausch & Lomb (Fed. Cir. 1989)  | 
          609-621  | 
          ||||
ReExamination  | 
          621-624  | 
          ||||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
        
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NOTE: the page number and case assignments below have not yet been adjusted for the 3rd edition of the case book. | |||||
Laches and Estoppel - Aukerman 
              v. R.L. Chaides  | 
          910-920  | 
          ||||
 Shop Rights - McElmurry 
              v. Ark. P&L  | 
          920-926  | 
          ||||
First Inventor Defense  | 
          926-928  | 
          stop before "Additional Defenses Exercise", 
              pg. 928  | 
          |||
Remedies Overview  | 
          930-931  | 
          stop before "H.H. Robertson . . ."  | 
          |||
Permanent Injunctions  | 
          940-941  | 
          ||||
Damages - Panduit 
              v. Stahlin  | 
          941-947  | 
          stop before "Rite-Hite . . ."  | 
          |||
| Assignment | Start Page | Comment/Notes | {resv.}  | 
            Date  | 
            Call Group  | 
			
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
{ forthcoming }  | 
            |||||
Last modified on April 29, 2010, by Greg R. Vetter