The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuitâ€™s Impact on Patent Litigation
More than 20 years after the establishment of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), research has yet to explain accurately the new courtâ€™s impact on patent litigation, patenting, and inventive activity. To address this shortcoming in the literature, we analyze a novel data set that permits us to consider separately the issues of validity and infringement in comparing the tendencies of the CAFC with those of its predecessor appeals courts. Our analysis of district and appellate decisions spanning 1953â€“2002 yields a recasting of the â€œpro-patentâ€ nature of the CAFC: while it has been significantly more reluctant than its predecessors to affirm decisions of invalidity, it has not been more reluctant to affirm â€œnot infringedâ€ decisions. Because of the CAFCâ€™s tendencies, district courts have decided patents to be invalid significantly less often, patentees have appealed decisions of invalidity significantly more often, and infringement has become the more frequently decisive inquiry.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Donald W.K. Andrews, 1990.
"Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point,"
Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers
943, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
- Andrews, Donald W K, 1993. "Tests for Parameter Instability and Structural Change with Unknown Change Point," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(4), pages 821-56, July.
- Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 129-51, Spring.
- Kessler, Daniel & Meites, Thomas & Miller, Geoffrey P, 1996. "Explaining Deviations from the Fifty-Percent Rule: A Multimodal Approach to the Selection of Cases for Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 25(1), pages 233-59, January.
- Bronwyn Hall, 2004.
"Exploring the patent explosion,"
ESRC Centre for Business Research - Working Papers
wp291, ESRC Centre for Business Research.
- Hall, Bronwyn H & Ziedonis, Rosemarie Ham, 2001. "The Patent Paradox Revisited: An Empirical Study of Patenting in the U.S. Semiconductor Industry, 1979-1995," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 101-28, Spring.
- Perron, P, 1988.
"The Great Crash, The Oil Price Shock And The Unit Root Hypothesis,"
338, Princeton, Department of Economics - Econometric Research Program.
- Perron, Pierre, 1989. "The Great Crash, the Oil Price Shock, and the Unit Root Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(6), pages 1361-1401, November.
- Marco, Alan C., 2005. "Learning by Suing: Structural Estimates of Court Errors in Patent Litigation," Vassar College Department of Economics Working Paper Series 68, Vassar College Department of Economics.
- George L. Priest & Benjamin Klein, 1984. "The Selection of Disputes for Litigation," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 1-56, January.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlstud:v:35:y:2006:p:85-117. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.