'Covenants Not to Sue' Provide Less Immunity in a Post-Medimmune World

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW
Edo B. Royker
{"title":"'Covenants Not to Sue' Provide Less Immunity in a Post-Medimmune World","authors":"Edo B. Royker","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1478198","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Note addresses the impact of the totality of circumstances test, as now adopted by the Federal Circuit, on covenants not to sue in the Declaratory Judgment (DJ) context. Under the old reasonable apprehension test, promises not to sue were given greater weight than under the new totality of the circumstances test. Part I of this Note addresses the new totality of the circumstances test under Medimmune and Sandisk. Part II of this Note compares the application of promises not to sue in pre-Medimmune and post-Medimmune decisions. Although the current case law does not indicate an extreme change from the pre-Medimmune decisions, the dicta in these cases indicates that a more extreme change may be forthcoming. Finally, Part III responds to a number of scholarly articles that have indicated disapproval of the Federal Circuit’s totality of the circumstances test by applying twofold analysis, taking into account exposed revenue and burdensome litigation costs, to four potential bargaining scenarios between hypothetical licensors and licensees.","PeriodicalId":46736,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Law Journal","volume":"61 1","pages":"473"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2009-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1478198","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Note addresses the impact of the totality of circumstances test, as now adopted by the Federal Circuit, on covenants not to sue in the Declaratory Judgment (DJ) context. Under the old reasonable apprehension test, promises not to sue were given greater weight than under the new totality of the circumstances test. Part I of this Note addresses the new totality of the circumstances test under Medimmune and Sandisk. Part II of this Note compares the application of promises not to sue in pre-Medimmune and post-Medimmune decisions. Although the current case law does not indicate an extreme change from the pre-Medimmune decisions, the dicta in these cases indicates that a more extreme change may be forthcoming. Finally, Part III responds to a number of scholarly articles that have indicated disapproval of the Federal Circuit’s totality of the circumstances test by applying twofold analysis, taking into account exposed revenue and burdensome litigation costs, to four potential bargaining scenarios between hypothetical licensors and licensees.
在后媒介免疫时代,“不起诉公约”提供的豁免权更少
本说明论述了联邦巡回法院目前采用的情况总体检验标准对宣告性判决(DJ)情况下不起诉契约的影响。在旧的合理逮捕测试中,不起诉的承诺比在新的总体情况测试中更重要。本说明的第一部分涉及Medimmune和Sandisk下的环境测试的新总体。本说明的第二部分比较了不起诉承诺在medium - mune前和medium - mune后判决中的应用。虽然目前的判例法并没有表明与medimmune之前的判决相比会发生极端的变化,但这些案件中的判决表明,可能会出现更极端的变化。最后,第三部分通过对假定许可人和被许可人之间的四种潜在讨价还价情景进行双重分析,回应了一些学术文章,这些文章表示不赞成联邦巡回法院的总体情况测试,考虑到暴露的收入和繁重的诉讼成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Hastings College of the Law was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California, and today is one of the top-rated law schools in the United States. Its alumni span the globe and are among the most respected lawyers, judges and business leaders today. Hastings was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California and is one of the most exciting and vibrant legal education centers in the nation. Our faculty are nationally renowned as both teachers and scholars.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信