Cannabis and Patent Law: Lessons from a Canadian Cannabis Case Study
Katherine Minorini Cannabis is illegal under federal law in the United States, yet individual states have legalized it for both medicinal and recreational use. Additionally, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) routinely issues patents for cannabis-related inventions despite the drug’s federal prohibition. As the prospect of federal legalization becomes more likely, patent protection will play a crucial role in the budding cannabis market. By evaluating Canada’s legal cannabis system, this Essay identifies lessons the United States can take from the Canadian legalization framework. Ultimately, this Essay asserts that the United States should take quick action and legalize cannabis...
Expanding the Patent Eligibility of Diagnostic Tests and Their Methods
Jo-an Chen There is ongoing debate over whether diagnostic tests and their methods should be patent eligible. As it stands today, these tests are largely unpatentable given the restrictive interpretation of patent eligibility laws in the United States. Some argue that patent claims directed to observing a law of nature, such as diagnostic tests, should remain patent ineligible to prevent an inventor from monopolizing basic tools of science. Others argue that diagnostic tests should be patent eligible to incentivize and encourage similar types of socially beneficial discoveries and inventions. This Essay agrees with the policy rationale for expanding the patent...
Driving in Circles: Impact of American Axle on Patent Eligibility Jurisprudence and Green Initiatives in the Automotive Industry
Zoë Haggerty A recent executive order signed by President Biden establishes a National Climate Task Force to oversee the conversion of the federal fleet to all-electric vehicles. If the President’s goal is to be achieved, the Supreme Court must review patent eligibility jurisprudence and provide guidance to the “bitterly divided” Federal Circuit. Fortuitously, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to do precisely that by granting certiorari to American Axle & Manufacturing v. Neapco Holdings LLC and clarifying the exact standard courts are to apply when determining cases of patent eligibility. Given the ever more pressing need for intelligibility in patent eligibility jurisprudence...
Deference Runs Deep
Brooks Kenyon Under 35 U.S.C §101, a patent must be either a new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter and, thus, must not lay claim to any idea that is abstract. This abstraction can be increasingly difficult to eliminate when drafting software claims because the implementation of code onto a generic computer is somewhat abstract in nature. Areas of software that are, and are not, abstract have been hotly debated and a thorn in the side of court system. Hence, when Justice Thomas opined that the Supreme Court “need not labor to delimit the precise contours of...