Expanding the Use of Hypothetical Analysis When Evaluating Patent Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents
Brian E. Lewis
Abstract
Open-access reader
Brian E. Lewis
Abstract
Open-access reader
Accordingly, the purpose of this Comment is twofold: first, to bring the reader up-to-date on the doctrine of equivalents, and second, to suggest an improvement on the doctrine's application that is consistent with recent developments. This Comment proposes that the hypothetical technique should be expanded to evaluate more than prior art alone. Before exploring how this new use of the hypothetical would work, however, it is necessary to explain the doctrine of equivalents' history, the factors that affect the range of equivalents, and the methods to determine and apply equivalents.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Accordingly, the purpose of this Comment is twofold: first, to bring the reader up-to-date on the doctrine of equivalents, and second, to suggest an improvement on the doctrine's application that is consistent with recent developments. This Comment proposes that the hypothetical technique should be expanded to evaluate more than prior art alone. Before exploring how this new use of the hypothetical would work, however, it is necessary to explain the doctrine of equivalents' history, the factors that affect the range of equivalents, and the methods to determine and apply equivalents.
Key concepts: Patent infringement, Doctrine, Fair use, Equivalent, Law, Law and economics, Patent law, Business