Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Patent Litigation Updated April 2018 3Rd Edition Full Chapter
Patent Litigation Updated April 2018 3Rd Edition Full Chapter
Patent Litigation Updated April 2018 3Rd Edition Full Chapter
8
PATENT LITIGATION
Third Edition
Edited by
Charles S. Barquist
Incorporating Release #6
September 2018
#239472
9
This work is designed to provide practical and useful
information on the subject matter covered. However, it is
sold with the understanding that neither the publisher nor
the author is engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or
other professional services. If legal advice or other expert
assistance is required, the services of a competent
professional should be sought.
10
recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of Practising
Law Institute.
LCCN: 2012217929
ISBN: 978-1-4024-2515-8
11
About the Contributors
Editor
CHARLES S. BARQUIST is the editor of this book, the author of chapter 1,
and a coauthor of chapter 15. He is a partner in the Los Angeles office of
Morrison & Foerster LLP, and specializes in the litigation and trial of
patent and other intellectual property disputes. Mr. Barquist received an
A.B. degree with high distinction and high honors in history from the
University of Michigan in 1975. He received a J.D., cum laude, from
Harvard Law School in 1978. Following graduation, Mr. Barquist served
as a law clerk to the Honorable Milton Pollack, United States District
Judge for the Southern District of New York. He joined Morrison &
Foerster in 1987, and has worked in the firm’s New York, San Francisco,
Tokyo, and Los Angeles offices. Representative clients include Capital
One, Fujitsu Limited, DISH Network, and Compal Electronics. Mr.
Barquist is a past president of the Los Angeles Intellectual Property Law
Association, a past chair of the Intellectual Property and Entertainment
Law Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association, and is the
current chair of the USC Gould School of Law IP Institute.
12
Forest University School of Law and an M.B.A. from Wake Forest
University.
RICHARD BIRNHOLZ is a coauthor of chapter 3. He is a partner in the
Los Angeles office of Irell & Manella LLP. He is a member of the firm’s
litigation and intellectual property workgroups. Mr. Birnholz has extensive
experience in complex litigation in federal and state courts, specializing in
high-stakes patent litigation in courts throughout the country. He has tried
cases in the U.S. district courts and before the International Trade
Commission and has successfully argued appeals before the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Mr. Birnholz has been selected by Los
Angeles Magazine for inclusion in Southern California “Rising Stars” in
2004 and Southern California “Super Lawyers” in 2017 for the twelfth
consecutive year. Before joining Irell & Manella LLP, Mr. Birnholz served
as a law clerk to the Honorable Pamela Ann Rymer, U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Ninth Circuit, and as an extern for the Honorable Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, then a judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
During law school, Mr. Birnholz served on the editorial board of the
UCLA Law Review and published a comment entitled “The Validity and
Propriety of Contingent Fee Controls,” 37 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 949 (1990).
BENJAMIN HABER is a coauthor of chapter 3. He is an associate in the
Los Angeles office of Irell & Manella LLP, where he is a member of the
IP litigation practice group. Mr. Haber has represented high-technology
clients from various fields (including medical devices, video processing,
and mobile communications) in complex IP litigation matters. He is
admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Mr.
Haber has spoken and written extensively on the America Invents Act. Mr.
Haber earned his J.D. from Loyola Law School where he was Chief
Technology Editor of the Loyola Law Review. He graduated magna cum
laude, Order of the Coif, and was a Sayre MacNiel Scholar. While at
Loyola, Mr. Haber also participated in the Giles Sutherland Rich Patent
Moot Court Competition and received the “Best Appellate Brief” award.
Prior to law school, Mr. Haber was an accomplished engineer, working in
aerospace engineering, optical engineering, and systems engineering; he
worked as an engineer at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, as well as at
Northrop Grumman Corporation. As an Adjunct Professor, Mr. Haber has
taught Patent Law at his alma mater, Loyola Law School.
BRIAN E. FERGUSON is the author of chapter 4. He is a partner in Weil
Gotshal’s patent litigation practice, specializing in high technology patent
disputes involving a wide array of technologies. Nationally recognized as a
leader in patent law, Mr. Ferguson represents clients in patent infringement
13
and validity disputes before district courts and in section 337
investigations before the U.S. International Trade Commission. He has
handled dozens of patent-related appeals and successfully argued
numerous appeals before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
and the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office. He successfully argued before an en banc panel of the
Federal Circuit in In re Seagate Technology LLC, in which the court
changed the standard for proving willful infringement and clarified the
scope of attorney-client privilege waiver in patent cases. Mr. Ferguson has
taught as an adjunct professor at the George Washington University
School of Law, and regularly writes on patent litigation and technology
topics. He is a member of the Federal Circuit Bar Association and the
American Intellectual Property Law Association. He has been recognized
as one of the “top 50 under 45” IP practitioners in the United States by IP
Law & Business, and as a leading IP lawyer by The Best Lawyers in
America in 2008 and 2009. He received his J.D. from Albany Law School
and his B.S.E.E., magna cum laude, from Union College.
KAREN A. JACOBS is a coauthor of chapter 5. She is a partner at Morris,
Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP. Her practice focuses primarily on patent
litigation. She also has experience with a variety of other intellectual
property and commercial litigation areas, including copyright, trademark,
trade secret, unfair competition, and contract and licensing disputes. Ms.
Jacobs has been recognized for legal excellence by Chambers USA: Guide
to America’s Leading Lawyers for Business, The Best Lawyers in America,
Law and Business Media, Delaware Super Lawyers and Managing
Intellectual Property as one of the top women in IP. In 2009, Ms. Jacobs
was the recipient of the Delaware State Bar Association’s Women’s
Leadership Award, as well as the Delaware State Bar Association’s
Community Service Award in 2003. Ms. Jacobs is a graduate of the
University of Pennsylvania and the Harvard Law School.
MEGAN E. DELLINGER is a coauthor of chapter 5. She is an associate in
the Intellectual Property Group at Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell LLP.
Her practice focuses primarily on patent litigation. Ms. Dellinger received
her J.D. from the University of Virginia School of Law, where she was an
executive editor of the Virginia Law Review and a member of the Order of
the Coif. She completed her undergraduate work at The College of
William & Mary, graduating with honors with a B.S. in chemistry.
ELEANOR G. TENNYSON is a coauthor of chapter 5. She is an associate
in the Intellectual Property Group at Morris, Nichols, Arsht & Tunnell
LLP. Her practice focuses primarily on patent litigation. Ms. Tennyson
14
received her B.A. in Chemistry, with honors, from Grinnell College and
her M.S. in Chemistry from Clemson University. She graduated with
distinction from the University of Iowa College of Law, where she was a
managing editor of Iowa Law Review.
JASON R. BARTLETT is a coauthor of chapter 6. An attorney at Mauriel
Kapouytian Woods LLP, he has over fifteen years of experience in
intellectual property litigation, commercial arbitration, and licensing. His
engagements have involved a broad range of technologies and industries.
In the life sciences, he has experience with monoclonal antibody
therapeutics and diagnostics, vaccines, and medical devices. In computers
and electronics, he has litigated design and utility patents relating to
smartphone software and hardware, cellular telecommunications standards,
global positioning systems, programmable logic devices, and CAD
software.
HUI LIU is a coauthor of chapter 6. She is an attorney at Mauriel
Kapouytian Woods LLP. She has litigated cases involving complex
technological issues for nearly a decade and has represented many
international clients in patent infringement, patent licensing, and other
contractual disputes before various U.S. district courts, New York state
courts, and the U.S. International Trade Commission. She has also
represented clients in international arbitration proceedings presenting
complex commercial and contract law issues. Ms. Liu has handled many
matters involving cutting-edge technologies including pharmaceutical
development, metabolomics, semiconductor manufacturing, and plasma
and liquid crystal displays.
CHARLES W. SABER is a coauthor of chapter 7. He is a partner in the
Washington, D.C. office of Blank Rome LLP. His practice focuses on all
aspects of intellectual property law, with an emphasis on intellectual
property litigation. Mr. Saber has participated in scores of intellectual
property lawsuits at the trial and appellate levels involving patent,
trademark, copyright, unfair competition, and trade secret issues. These
actions have been filed in both federal and state courts and span a variety
of industries. Mr. Saber has lectured extensively on a wide variety of
intellectual property matters on both patent and trademark matters. He is
coauthor of the Introduction to Intellectual Property Law (1994), and his
articles on intellectual property matters have appeared in a wide variety of
publications. Mr. Saber graduated magna cum laude in 1979 from the
Georgetown Law Center.
DIPU A. DOSHI is a coauthor of chapter 7. A partner in the Washington,
D.C. office of Blank Rome LLP, Mr. Doshi focuses his practice in all
15
aspects of patent law, with an emphasis on patent litigation and client
counseling. Mr. Doshi has experience in a wide variety of technological
fields, including pharmaceutical and chemical compounds, biological
molecules, DNA sequences, computer memory, imaging devices,
semiconductor inventions, and computer networks.
MEGAN R. WOOD is a coauthor of chapter 7. She is an associate at the
Washington, D.C. office of Blank Rome LLP. She primarily focuses her
practice on patent litigation and patent prosecution. During law school,
Ms. Wood served as a judicial intern for the Honorable James J. Fitzgerald
III, Appellate Judge of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. She also
served as an associate editor on The Villanova Environmental Law
Journal.
CHRISTOPHER J. RENK is a coauthor of chapter 8. He is a senior partner
at Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., in Chicago, and specializes in litigating
intellectual property cases. He has successfully litigated cases at the trial
and appellate levels, spanning a broad range of technologies including
computer hardware, electrical controls, medical devices, and athletic
footwear. He is an Adjunct Professor of Law at the Georgetown Law
Center, where he teaches Patent Trial Practice, and is a contributing author
of the ABA/IP Section-sponsored Patent Litigation Strategies Handbook.
TED L. FIELD is a coauthor of chapter 8. He is Professor of Law, South
Texas College of Law, Houston.
KAREN VOGEL WEIL is a coauthor of chapter 9. She is a partner in the
Los Angeles office of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP. Ms. Weil has
experience in all aspects of intellectual property litigation, including
representing plaintiffs and defendants in patent, trademark, copyright and
trade secret disputes. She has both trial and appellate experience. Ms. Weil
is also experienced in the area of patent damages. Ms. Weil has spoken
extensively on patent litigation issues. She received her J.D. with honors
from the George Washington University Law School, where she was a
member of the George Washington Journal of International Law &
Economics, and her B.A. cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa, from the University
of California—Davis.
YANNA S. BOURIS is a coauthor of chapter 9. She is a partner in the Los
Angeles office of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP. Ms. Bouris
represents clients in all areas of intellectual property law, including
patents, trademarks, copyrights and unfair competition. Ms. Bouris has
represented both plaintiffs and defendants in litigation matters involving
diverse technologies, including medical devices, biotechnology, and
computer networking. She has also handled the damages case of several
16
high-stakes patent litigation matters. Ms. Bouris joined the firm in 2003
and became partner in 2009. She received her J.D. from Stanford Law
School and her B.A., with highest honors, from the University of
California—Berkeley. Prior to attending law school, Ms. Bouris worked in
the biotechnology industry in the areas of genetics, real-time PCR, and
HIV diagnostics at Life Technologies, Inc., Calytpe Biomedical, and the
Joslin Diabetes Center.
SHUCHEN GONG is a coauthor of chapter 9. She is an associate in the
San Francisco Office of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP. Her
practice includes licensing, preparation and prosecution of patent
applications and trademark prosecution. She received her law degree from
Cornell Law School and her B.S. in Chemistry and B.A. in Economics
from the University of California, Berkeley.
JOSEPH A. FARCO is the author of chapter 10. He is a member of the
intellectual property law group at Locke Lord LLP, and has considerable
experience in patent litigation, ITC proceedings, and patent prosecution.
Mr. Farco has been involved in numerous aspects of the patent trial,
including initial settlement discussions, fact and expert discovery,
summary judgment, post-hearing briefing, and appeals. He received a B.E.
in mechanical engineering and an M.S. in engineering management, both
from Stevens Institute of Technology; an M.S. in pharmaceutical
chemistry from the University of Florida; and a J.D. from New York Law
School. He was named a Rising Star for Intellectual Property Law by
Super Lawyers (2012–2016).
DON W. MARTENS is a coauthor of chapter 11. He is of counsel to the
Irvine, California, intellectual property law firm of Knobbe, Martens,
Olson & Bear, LLP. The firm has been named the best intellectual
property law firm in the western United States for five years in a row in a
worldwide survey of 3,000 IP lawyers conducted by Managing Intellectual
Property magazine. Mr. Martens specializes in litigation of IP cases. He
has been named one of the top twenty patent attorneys in the world in a
comprehensive international survey by Euromoney Legal Media Group.
He was President of the American Intellectual Property Law Association
in 1996. Currently he is a member of the Advisory Council of the Court of
Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
JOHN B. SGANGA, JR. is a coauthor of chapter 11. He is a partner in the
Irvine, California, office of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP, where
he practices as an intellectual property litigator. He graduated magna cum
laude in 1981 from Lafayette College, with a B.S. in mechanical
engineering. He received his J.D. from New York University School of
17
Law in 1984. Mr. Sganga has authored numerous articles on intellectual
property law issues. Mr. Sganga was awarded the Rossman Award by the
Patent and Trademark Office Society in 1990 for his article regarding the
constitutionality of direct molding statutes. Mr. Sganga has lectured on
intellectual property law issues for CEB, PLI, UC Irvine, and other groups.
Mr. Sganga served as President of the Orange County Barristers and has
served on the Board of Directors of the Orange County Bar Association.
DAVID W. BEEHLER is a coauthor of chapter 12. He is of counsel to the
Minneapolis office of the national law firm of Robins Kaplan LLP. He
practices in all areas of business litigation, with an emphasis in intellectual
property litigation. He has experience in patent, trademark, and copyright
litigation, having represented clients in federal courts around the country
in such matters. Some of the clients Mr. Beehler has represented include
Unocal, Best Buy Co., Inc., and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota. Mr.
Beehler is a member of the Missouri, Kansas, and Minnesota bars, the
related state and federal courts, including the Federal Circuit, Eighth, and
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the United States Supreme Court. He
obtained his B.S., summa cum laude, in English from St. Cloud State
University, Minnesota, and his J.D., cum laude, from the University of
Minnesota in 1985.
MUNIR R. MEGHJEE is a coauthor of chapter 12. He is a partner in the
Minneapolis office of Robins Kaplan LLP. He is an experienced litigator
and trial lawyer with over two decades of representing a diverse client base
in a broad variety of matters focusing on patent rights, trade secrets, and
other forms of intellectual property. He has particular experience in
helping clients realize and protect the full value of their intellectual
property assets and investments through licensing, sale, and enforcement
of patent rights. Mr. Meghjee’s national practice has included representing
corporations and academic institutions on both sides of patent and trade
secret litigation in both state and federal court, as well as at the appellate
level. His clients span a broad spectrum of industries and technologies,
including the Internet, computer hardware, software and software systems,
and medical devices. Mr. Meghjee has taught trial advocacy for the
National Institute of Trial Advocacy (NITA), and has also taught trial
advocacy internationally as an instructor with the Lawyers Without
Borders Support Through Trial Advocacy Training Program in Nairobi,
Kenya. Mr. Meghjee received his B.A. from Colorado College and his
J.D., cum laude, from Northwestern University School of Law, where he
was Articles Editor for the Law Review.
DAVID A. PRANGE is a coauthor of chapter 12. He is an attorney in the
18
Minneapolis office of Robins Kaplan LLP. His practice focuses on
complex litigation with an emphasis on intellectual property, including
patents, trademarks, and trade secrets. He is experienced in patent
infringement litigation in multiple technology areas, including computer
hardware and software, consumer and commercial water filtration and
purification, wireless sensor monitoring, and irrigation control. Mr. Prange
is a registered patent attorney. He has a B.A. in biology, magna cum laude
and Phi Beta Kappa, from Saint Olaf College. He received a J.D. with high
distinction from University of Nebraska—Lincoln College of Law, where
he was a member of the Order of the Coif.
JAMES R. BARNEY is a coauthor of chapter 13. He is an attorney in the
firm of Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, and
received a J.D. from Yale Law School (1999). Mr. Barney’s practice
involves patent litigation, opinion writing, and client counseling, primarily
in the chemical, cosmetic, and pharmaceutical areas.
J. DEREK MCCORQUINDALE is a coauthor of chapter 13. He is an
associate at Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP,
where he focuses his practice on patent litigation, at both the trial and
appellate levels. He has appeared in cases before federal district courts, the
International Trade Commission (ITC), and the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit, where he has contributed to several successful appeals.
He received a J.D., cum laude, from Duke University School of Law.
PAUL D. TRIPODI II is a coauthor of chapter 14. He is a partner in
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati’s intellectual property litigation
practice, where he focuses on patent litigation. Prior to joining the firm, he
was a partner in the Los Angeles office of Sidley Austin LLP, where he
was a member of the West Coast intellectual property and technology
practice. Paul has been involved in both bench and jury trials, as well as
proceedings before various international tribunals and the International
Trade Commission. In addition to his work as an IP litigator, he volunteers
as a Criminal Prosecutor on behalf of the State of California. Prior to his
graduation from UCLA School of Law, Paul earned a B.S. in Chemistry
from the Pennsylvania State University and an M.S. in Chemical Physics
from the California Institute of Technology.
ELLEN S. ROBBINS is a coauthor of chapter 14. She is partner in the Los
Angeles office of Sidley Austin LLP and a member of the firm’s
Intellectual Property Litigation and Complex Commercial Litigation
groups. Prior to 2015, Ms. Robbins practiced in the Firm’s Chicago office
for more than twenty-two years. She has extensive experience handling
matters on behalf of public and private companies all over the world in
19
both state and federal court, with a particular emphasis on intellectual
property litigation, as well as commercial matters involving breach of
contract, fraud, unfair competition, alter ego, securities law, insolvency,
and misappropriation. Ms. Robbins has worked on numerous matters and
has had multiple trials before the International Trade Commission (ITC),
and has successfully litigated numerous patent cases, including the
landmark Microsoft/Motorola RAND royalty cases. Ms. Robbins has been
a partner of the firm since 1999. Before joining the firm, she clerked for
the Honorable Charles P. Kocoras of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois. She received her J.D., magna cum laude, from
Harvard Law School, and her B.S. in Business Management, summa cum
laude, from the University of Illinois.
GRACE PAK is a coauthor of chapter 14. She is an associate in the Los
Angeles office of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, where her practice
focuses on patent litigation. Her experience in patent litigation involves
technologies such as Internet technology and nutritional supplements. Ms.
Pak also has significant experience prosecuting numerous patent
applications and counseling clients for a variety of technologies, including
medical devices, optics, display devices, computer hardware, and software.
She received her J.D., cum laude, from the UC Hastings College of the
Law, where she was the recipient of awards for excellence in copyrights,
trademarks, and contracts; her B.S. in Biomedical Engineering is from
Northwestern University. During law school, Ms. Pak served as a judicial
extern to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer of the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California. Prior to joining the firm, she was an
associate at Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP.
MATTHEW KREEGER is a coauthor of chapter 15. He is a partner at
Morrison & Foerster LLP, and specializes in intellectual property trials, as
well as patent interferences and reexaminations. Mr. Kreeger received an
A.B. degree with highest distinction in mathematics from the University of
California at Berkeley in 1987. He received a J.D., magna cum laude, from
Harvard University in 1990. Following graduation, Mr. Kreeger served as
a law clerk to the Honorable Judith Rogers, District of Columbia Court of
Appeals. He joined Morrison & Foerster’s litigation department in 1991,
and became a partner in 1998. Mr. Kreeger is the chair of the firm’s patent
interference practice group, and frequently advises clients on patent
prosecution and pre-litigation strategy issues. He has represented
numerous life science clients and information technologies clients
including Novartis, Apple, and Yahoo!
LAURENCE H. PRETTY planned and edited the first two editions of this
20
book and was the original author of chapters 1 and 9. He has a solo patent
practice in Pasadena, focused on serving as consultant and expert witness,
acting as an ADR provider, and writing opinions on patents. For many
years, he was a trial lawyer with the firm of Pretty & Schroeder P.C., an
L.A. patent litigation boutique, and subsequently was a partner in Hogan &
Hartson LLP. He has tried many patent cases for companies of all sizes
before juries and to the court. He has also maintained a continuous
involvement in patent prosecution. Mr. Pretty was a law clerk at the U.S.
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals and taught as an adjunct lecturer in
patent law at U.C.L.A. Law School. He has been Chair of the IP Section of
the California State Bar and a Director of AIPLA. He received an
engineering degree from the Imperial College of Science and Technology,
U.K., and a law degree from George Washington University Law School.
Since 1996, he has been continuously listed in the publication The Best
Lawyers in America.
21
Table of Chapters
22
Table of Contents
23
§ 1:2.4 Remedies
§ 1:3 Defenses of Accused Infringer
§ 1:3.1 License and Assignment Defenses
[A] Licensee Estoppel Abrogation and Exceptions
[B] Implied License
§ 1:3.2 Noninfringement Defenses
[A] No Literal Infringement
[B] Limitations on the Doctrine of Equivalents
[B][1] Prosecution History Estoppel
[B][2] Prior Art As Limitation
[B][3] Disclosed but Unclaimed Embodiments
[C] Functionality Defense to Design Patent Infringement
[D] Repair Versus Reconstruction
[E] ANDA
[F] Prior Commercial Use Defense (Patents Subject to the 2011
Act)
§ 1:3.3 Defenses Against Patent Validity
[A] Expiration for Nonpayment of Maintenance Fees
[B] Collateral Estoppel by Prior Adjudication of Invalidity
[C] Lack of Novelty over the Prior Art Under Section 102
[C][1] The 1952 and 2011 Acts Differ in the Prior Art Applicable
to Applications Filed Before and After March 16, 2013
[D] Prior Art Under the 1952 Act
[D][1] Sections 102(a) and (b)
[D][2] Section 102(e)
[D][3] Section 102(g)
[E] Prior Art Under the 2011 Act
[E][1] Changes Expanding Prior Art
[E][2] One-Year Grace Period re Disclosures from the Inventor
[E][3] Derivation Proceedings Created; Interferences Eliminated
[E][4] Subsections of Sections 102 and 104 Dropped by the 2011
Act
[E][5] Tax Strategies Deemed Insufficient to Differentiate from the
Prior Art
[E][6] Best Mode Still Required but No Longer an Invalidity
Defense
[F] Obviousness (§ 103)
[F][1] Graham v. Deere and KSR Analyses
[F][2] Objective Evidence re Obviousness
[F][3] Obvious at What Time?
24
[G] Misnamed Inventorship
[H] Inadequately Disclosed or Claimed (§ 112)
[H][1] Enablement
[H][2] Best Mode
[H][3] Written Description
[H][4] Indefinitely Claimed
[I] Abandonment
[J] Double Patenting
[K] Nonstatutory Subject Matter or Inoperativeness
§ 1:3.4 Defenses of Patent Unenforceability
[A] Inequitable Conduct Before the PTO
[A][1] Inequitable Conduct Generally
[A][2] Materiality
[A][3] Intent to Deceive
[A][4] Consequences of Inequitable Conduct
[B] Laches and Equitable Estoppel
[B][1] In Litigation
[B][2] Laches in Patent Prosecution
[C] Patent Misuse
[C][1] Tying Unpatented Supplies
[C][2] Compulsory Package Licensing
[C][3] Price Fixing, Field of Use, Territorial, and Post-Sale
Restrictions
[C][4] 1988 Patent Misuse Reform Act
§ 1:3.5 Patent Exhaustion
§ 1:4 Immunity of States
§ 1:5 Claims Against a Patent Owner
§ 1:5.1 Challenges to Patent Liability, Inventorship, or Validity
[A] For Declaratory Judgment
[B] To Reform Inventorship Under 35 U.S.C. § 256
[C] Challenging Validity in the PTO
§ 1:5.2 Claims for Damages Caused by Abuse of Patent Rights
[A] Unfair Competition Basis
[B] Antitrust Violation Basis
[B][1] Fraud on the PTO
[B][2] After an “Objectively Baseless” Prior Suit
[B][3] Reverse Payment Settlement
[C] Standards-Setting Issues
25
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
— Ah ! vraiment, leur répond-on. Eh bien, la prochaine fois que
vous serez à Berlin, allez au Musée et vous verrez ce que possèdent
les Allemands. Ça a dû sortir de votre terrain. La Dynastie en est la
preuve. De sorte que la coupe de délice de A est empoisonnée
jusqu’à l’année prochaine.
Aucun collectionneur ou directeur de Musée ne devrait avoir de
scrupules, et je n’en ai jamais rencontré qui en eût, mais des
personnes de quatre nationalités différentes m’ont affirmé avec
indignation que les Allemands sont les pillards les plus éhontés de
tous.
Explorer c’est une chose à peu près aussi romanesque que le
travail de terrasse sur les chemins de fer indiens. Il y a les mêmes
tramways à voie étroite, les mêmes ânes, les mêmes équipes
reluisantes dans les mines, les mêmes foules, bleu foncé, de
femmes et d’enfants chargés de petits paniers pour porter la terre.
Mais les houes ne sont pas enfoncées, et les mottes lancées de
côté, n’importe comment, et lorsque le travail côtoie la base de
quelque énorme muraille les gens se servent de leurs mains
soigneusement. Un homme blanc, ou du moins qui l’était le matin à
déjeuner, va et vient dans une brume de poussière constamment
renouvelée. Des semaines peuvent passer sans qu’on trouve une
seule perle en verre, mais n’importe quoi peut surgir à n’importe quel
moment, et c’est alors à lui qu’il appartient de répondre au cri
annonçant une découverte.
Nous avons eu la bonne fortune de rester quelque temps à la
Direction du Musée Métropolitain (New-York) dans une vallée criblée
de tombes, comme une garenne. Les écuries, entrepôts et quartiers
de domestiques sont de vieilles tombes ; on n’y parle que de tombe ;
leur rêve (l’éternel rêve des fouilleurs) est de découvrir une tombe
vierge où gisent les morts intacts avec leurs bijoux sur eux. A quatre
kilomètres se trouvent les hôtels éclatants aux larges ailes. Ici il n’y a
rien d’autre que le détritus de la mort qui est morte il y a des milliers
d’années, sur la tombe de laquelle aucune verdure n’a jamais
poussé. Des villages rendus experts par le pillage des tombes
pendant deux cents générations s’accroupissent au milieu des
amoncellements de débris et huent le touriste quotidien. Des
sentiers faits par des pieds nus vont d’une demi-tombe, d’un demi-
tas de boue à l’autre, pas beaucoup plus distincts que des traînées
de colimaçon, mais on s’en est servi depuis…
Jouer avec le temps est chose dangereuse. Ce matin-là le
concierge s’était donné beaucoup de mal pour savoir si nous
pouvions gagner trois jours entre deux départs de bateaux. Ce
même soir nous nous trouvions parmi des gens pour qui le temps
n’avait pas bougé depuis les Ptolémées. Je me demandais de prime
abord ce qu’ils auraient dit, eux ou d’autres, si tel ou tel Pharaon
avait utilisé pour sa propre gloire les plinthes et les colonnes de tel
autre Pharaon avant ou après l’époque de Melchisedech. Tout leur
arrière-plan était trop éloigné pour que l’esprit pût se représenter
quoi que ce soit avec quelque chance de succès. Le lendemain
matin on nous conduisit à la tombe peinte d’un noble — un Ministre
de l’Agriculture — mort il y a quatre ou cinq mille ans. Il me dit, en
autant de paroles : « Remarquez ! Je ressemblais beaucoup à votre
ami, feu M. Samuel Pepys, de l’Amirauté. J’ai pris un prodigieux
intérêt à la vie, dont j’ai joui complètement, avec le corps et l’esprit à
la fois. Je doute que vous trouviez beaucoup de ministères mieux
gérés que le mien, ni une maison mieux dirigée, ni des jeunes gens
plus agréables… Voici mes filles ! L’aînée, vous le voyez bien,
ressemble à sa mère ; la cadette, ma favorite, passe pour me faire
honneur. Maintenant je vais vous montrer toutes les choses que j’ai
accomplies et auxquelles je prenais plaisir, jusqu’au moment où vint
l’heure de présenter mes comptes ailleurs. »
Et il me montra, détail par détail, en peinture et en dessin, son
bétail, ses chevaux, ses récoltes, ses tournées dans la région, ses
comptables présentant les chiffres de revenus, et lui-même le plus
affairé des affairés dans la bonne journée.
Mais lorsque nous quittâmes cette antichambre gaie et vînmes
au couloir plus étroit où jadis son corps était couché et où toute sa
destinée se trouve représentée, je ne pus le suivre aussi bien. Je ne
comprenais pas comment lui, avec sa grande expérience de la vie,
pouvait être intimidé par des frises d’apparitions à tête de brute, ou
satisfait par des files de personnages répétés. Il me l’expliqua à peu
près ainsi :
« Nous demeurons sur la rivière, ligne sans largeur ni épaisseur.
Derrière nous est le Désert que rien ne peut toucher, où ne va aucun
homme tant qu’il n’est pas mort. (On ne se sert pas du terrain
cultivable pour faire des cimetières). Alors, pratiquement, nous ne
nous mouvons que dans deux dimensions, en aval ou en amont du
fleuve. Enlevez le désert auquel nous ne pensons pas plus qu’un
homme sain ne pense à la mort et vous verrez que nous n’avons
aucun arrière-plan. Notre monde n’est qu’une grande barre de terre
brune ou verte et pendant quelques mois rien que de l’eau qui reflète
le ciel et qui efface tout. Vous n’avez qu’à regarder les Colosses
pour vous rendre compte des proportions extravagantes et
immenses que doivent prendre les hommes et leurs travaux dans un
tel pays. Rappelez-vous aussi que nos récoltes sont sûres et notre
vie très, très aisée. Surtout nous n’avons pas de voisins. C’est-à-dire
qu’il nous faut exporter et non importer. Or, je vous le demande, que
peut faire un prêtre doué d’imagination, sinon développer le rituel et
multiplier les Dieux sur des frises ? Le loisir illimité, l’espace limité de
deux dimensions, partagé par la ligne hypnotisante de la Rivière, et
borné par la mort visible inaltérable, doivent forcément… »
— Mais même alors, interrompis-je, je ne comprends pas vos
dieux, votre adoration directe de Bêtes par exemple.
— Vous préférez l’indirecte ? L’adoration de l’Humanité avec une
lettre majuscule ? Mes Dieux, ou plutôt ce que je voyais en eux, me
suffisaient.
— Qu’avez-vous vu dans vos Dieux touchant la croyance et la
conduite ?
— Vous connaissez la réponse à l’énigme du Sphynx ?
— Non, murmurai-je, quelle est-elle ?
— Tous les hommes sensés ont la même religion, mais aucun
homme sensé ne l’avoue. Je dus me contenter de cela car le couloir
se terminait en roc solide.
Il y avait d’autres tombes dans la vallée, mais leurs propriétaires
étaient muets, excepté un certain Pharaon qui, mû par les mobiles
les plus élevés, avait renoncé aux croyances et aux instincts de son
pays, et avait failli par là en causer la ruine. Une des découvertes
qu’il fit ce fut celle d’un artiste qui voyait les hommes, non sur un
seul plan mais modelés, de face ou de trois quarts, avec des
membres qui correspondaient à leurs fardeaux et à leurs attitudes.
Son œuvre admirablement vivante sautait aux yeux parmi des
kilomètres de bas-reliefs faits d’après les vieilles conventions et
j’applaudis ainsi que doit le faire un homme bien élevé.
— Mon erreur fut fatale, soupira à mon oreille Pharaon
Ahkenaton, je pris les conventions de la vie pour des réalités.
— Ah ! ces conventions qui paralysent l’âme, m’écriai-je.
— Vous me méprenez, moi, répondit-il avec plus de hauteur,
j’étais si sûr de leur réalité que je pensais qu’elles étaient des
mensonges réellement, tandis qu’elles n’ont été inventées que pour
couvrir les faits trop crus de l’existence.
— Ah ! ces faits crus de l’existence, m’écriai-je encore plus fort,
car ce n’est pas souvent qu’on a la chance d’impressionner un
Pharaon, il faut que nous les envisagions les yeux ouverts et l’esprit
ouvert. L’avez-vous fait, vous ?
— Je n’ai eu aucune occasion de les éviter, répondit-il, j’ai violé
toutes les conventions de mon pays.
— Ah ! quelle noblesse ! Et qu’arriva-t-il ?
— Ce qui arrive lorsque vous arrachez ce qui recouvre un nid de
frelons ! La vérité crue de l’existence est que l’humanité est un peu
plus bas que les Anges, et les conventions sont basées sur cette
vérité pour que les hommes deviennent des Anges. Mais si vous
partez, ainsi que je l’ai fait, de la convention que les hommes sont
des Anges, ils deviendront assurément plus que jamais des bêtes.
— Cela, répondis-je avec fermeté, n’est plus du tout d’actualité.
Vous auriez dû apporter une plus large mentalité, une révélation plus
vivifiante, et tout…, et tout…, vous savez bien ce que je veux dire —
pour influencer, enfin vous savez bien…
— C’est ce que j’ai fait, répondit Ahkenaton avec tristesse ; cela
m’a brisé. Et lui aussi se tut parmi les ruines.
Il y a une vallée de rochers et de pierres, de toutes les nuances
rouges et brunes, appelée la Vallée des Rois, où un petit moteur à
pétrole tousse derrière sa main tout le long du jour, moulant de
l’électricité pour éclairer les faces des Pharaons morts à cent pieds
sous terre. Par toute la vallée, pendant la saison des touristes, se
tiennent des chars-à-bancs et des ânes et des charrettes à sable
avec, par-ci par-là, des couples épuisés qui ont quitté la procession,
et, reluisants, s’éventent dans quelque fragment d’ombre. Longeant
les tombes de la vallée se trouvent les tombes des Rois numérotées
soigneusement comme autant d’entrées de mines, avec des
marches en ciment qui y montent et des grilles de fer qu’on ferme la
nuit et des concierges de la « Section des Antiquités » qui
demandent les billets indispensables. On entre, et, de profondeurs
sur profondeurs, on entend les voix résonnantes de dragomans
énumérant à tour de rôle les noms et les titres de morts illustres et
trois fois puissants. Des marches taillées dans le roc descendent
jusque dans une obscurité chaude et immobile, des couloirs
serpentent et conduisent au-dessus de trous en cul de sac que, dit-
on, les constructeurs avisés espéraient dans leur puérilité voir
prendre pour les vraies tombes par les voleurs de l’avenir. Le long
de ces couloirs, montent et descendent avec bruit toutes les races
de l’Europe et une bonne réserve des États-Unis. Leurs pas sont
subitement émoussés sur le parquet d’une salle pavée de poussière
immémoriale qui ne dansera jamais sous aucun vent. Ils lèvent les
yeux vers les ciels blasonnés, se baissent pour examiner les murs
minutieusement décorés, tendent le cou pour suivre les sombres
splendeurs d’une corniche, retiennent leur souffle, et regrimpent vers
l’impitoyable soleil pour replonger dans l’entrée suivante indiquée
sur leur programme. Ce qu’ils jugent bon de dire ils le disent à haute
voix, et parfois il est intéressant de les entendre. Ce qu’ils éprouvent,
vous pouvez le deviner d’après une certaine hâte dans leurs
mouvements, quelque chose d’intermédiaire entre la modestie
hésitante d’un homme exposé au feu et l’attitude de ceux qui visitent
une mine, qui dit clairement « ne ferions-nous pas bien d’avancer ? »
Après tout, ce n’est pas naturel pour l’homme d’aller sous terre, sauf
pour affaires ou pour le dernier voyage. Il a conscience du poids de
la terre-mère au-dessus de lui, et lorsqu’à tout son poids à elle, —
auquel il s’attend bien, — il faut qu’il ajoute toute la hiérarchie
couronnée, à bec, à cornes, à ailes, appartenant à une foi morte qui
flamboie chaque fois qu’il tourne les yeux, il a naturellement envie de
s’en aller. Même la vue d’un très, très grand roi, en sarcophage,
exposé à la lumière électrique, dans une salle remplie de tableaux
très fortifiants, ne le retient pas trop longtemps.
Certains affirment que la crypte de St-Pierre à Rome, avec
seulement dix-neuf siècles pesant sur les arêtes, mais entourée de
tous côtés par les tombes des premiers papes et d’anciens rois, est
plus impressionnante que la Vallée des Rois parce qu’elle explique
comment une croyance existante est née et de quoi elle est sortie.
Mais la Vallée des Rois n’explique rien sinon ce vers si terrible de
Macbeth :