Knocking the Eagle off the Patent Owner's Shoulder: Chiron Holds That Jurors Don't Have to Be Told That a Patent Is Presumed Valid

By Bohrer, David C. | Santa Clara Computer & High Technology Law Journal, November 2004 | Go to article overview

Knocking the Eagle off the Patent Owner's Shoulder: Chiron Holds That Jurors Don't Have to Be Told That a Patent Is Presumed Valid


Bohrer, David C., Santa Clara Computer & High Technology Law Journal


I. INTRODUCTION

The development of patent law in the United States has been marked by a high level of confidence that the Patent Office "gets it right" when it issues a patent. This confidence sprang up from the belief that a patent application is subjected to a thorough investigation by well-trained examiners who regularly analyze the technical issues presented by the patent application, and whose job it is, day in and day out, to make sure that patents are awarded to only those applications that comply with the patent rules.

Based upon the high level of confidence in the decisions made by Patent Office examiners, courts derived the presumption that a patent is valid. Congress ultimately codified both this presumption, and that the burden of proving invalidity, falls upon the person challenging the patent, in amendments to the patent statute. Courts, in turn, have interpreted the amended statute as requiring that the challenger meet a higher standard of proof, clear and convincing evidence, in order to overcome the presumption.

The overall effect of the presumptions, burdens and standards originating from the core confidence in the patent examiner's decision is to make it harder to invalidate an issued patent. Patent owners therefore wear the American eagle on their shoulders: those who attack the validity of a patent must overcome the significant obstacles that spring from the belief that the government "gets it right."

There is a perception among an increasing number of legislators, judges, and practitioners, however, that patent examiners are making mistakes and issuing an unduly large number of invalid patents. This perception has caused the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and, most recently, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) to propose changes to the patent laws that make it easier to challenge the validity of issued patents. (1) The proposed reforms therefore seek to knock the eagle off of patent owners' shoulders: the growing suspicion that the government "gets it wrong" has created the impetus for reforms directed at lowering, if not eliminating, the significant obstacles to proving invalidity.

The recent decision in Chiron Corp. v. Genentech, Inc. demonstrates that the Federal Circuit is already moving in the same direction as the proposed reforms. (2) In Chiron, the Federal Circuit held that the district court was not required to instruct the jury that a patent is presumed valid. (3) The decision of the Federal Circuit thus set the stage to approve of a situation where the presumed correctness of the government's actions and the presumed validity of the patent are not readily transparent to the jury in the trial of a patent infringement case. (4) Although not so far reaching as the FTC's proposal to lower the burden of proving invalidity, Chiron knocks the eagle off of the patent owner's shoulder by denying the jury the compelling explanation for why the heavy burden of proving invalidity is imposed upon the party challenging the validity of the patent. Chiron is likely a harbinger of further judicial implementation of the proposed reforms. Its unspoken, but nonetheless obvious rationale, is that the challenger should not bear the traditional heavy burdens associated with proving invalidity if the patent examiner cannot be relied upon to "get it right."

II. PATENT OWNERS WEAR THE EAGLE ON THEIR SHOULDERS

A recurrent theme throughout what are literally decades of developing patent law is the confidence expressed by judges, practicing attorneys, and academics in the job done by the Patent Office. Patent examiners have long been viewed as correctly examining patents to make sure the claimed invention meets the statutory tests of patentable subject matter, (5) novelty, (6) nonobviousness, (7) utility, (8) and disclosure (9) such that, at least historically, there has been a high level of confidence that bad patents are not being allowed to slip through the system. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • A full archive of books and articles related to this one
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Knocking the Eagle off the Patent Owner's Shoulder: Chiron Holds That Jurors Don't Have to Be Told That a Patent Is Presumed Valid
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

    Already a member? Log in now.