Questions Raised by the Lexmark Decision
By Robert L. Stoll
Robert Stoll, partner and co-chair of the intellectual property practice in Washington, D.C., wrote an article for IP Watchdog, “Questions Raised by the Lexmark Decision,” discussing the Supreme Court’s May 30 ruling in Impression Products v. Lexmark. The decision may cause U.S. companies to rethink their long-standing practice of setting regional pricing for products in foreign countries, thereby reducing the rights of U.S. patent holders.
Robert writes, “Yet again, the Supreme Court has limited patent rights. The Supreme Court has become an activist court when reviewing patent law and has repeatedly changed law that has been established for decades.” He notes that the Supreme Court’s ruling in Lexmark follows a recent series of decisions that chip away at the United States’ status as the most favorable patent system in the world.
The material contained in this communication is informational, general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. The material contained in this communication should not be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances. This communication was published on the date specified and may not include any changes in the topics, laws, rules or regulations covered. Receipt of this communication does not establish an attorney-client relationship. In some jurisdictions, this communication may be considered attorney advertising.
Meet the Authors
