Sentences with phrase «justices question patent»

Four Justices Question Patent Trolls and Business Methods Patents in Concurring Opinion San Francisco - The United States Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision in the controversial eBay v. MercExchange patent case Monday, invalidating a dangerous precedent that threatened free speech and consumers» rights.

Not exact matches

That court referred the case to the European Court of Justice, asking it to decide several questions, including what the E.U. law means when it refers to «human embryos,» and whether the ban also covers patents that don't involve embryos directly but where the use of embryos «is a necessary precondition» for the covered process or product.

Speaking for the entire court, Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the 13 May opinion: «The question in this case is whether a farmer who buys patented seeds may reproduce them through planting and harvesting without the patent holder's permission.

The answer to that question isn't obvious at all; indeed, it's the subject that the Supreme Court took up yesterday at oral argument in KSR International v. Teleflex and covered by Tony Mauro in this article, Justices Slam Nation's Patent System (Law.com, 11/29/06).

In a 7 - 2 opinion authored by Associate Justice Thomas, the Court rejected Oil States» contention that the IPR process violated the separation of powers of Article III and a patent owner's Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial on the question of patent validity.

Justice Thomas did not ask any questions, and Justice Alito asked only one: whether Congress, which had the power not to enact any patent regime, was within its rights to enact one issuing patents subject to post-grant cancellation.

Many of the Justices» questions for the Respondent were based around the idea that applying the presumption against extraterritoriality here would prevent the patentee from being fully compensated for the patent infringement.

Update: The transcript of Monday's court is now available; legal observers have suggested that the Justices» line questioning mean they are inclined to invalidate Alice's patent, but not eliminate software patents altogether.

Four justices also joined in a concurring opinion questioning so - called «patent trolls» and business methods patents, which could foreshadow future intellectual property showdowns in the nation's highest court.