eBay brief in eBay v. MercExchange
The eBay brief repeats the urban legend that the Patent Office grants patents on 97% of all applications. It isn't true, and Quillen (and Webster) never said it was. Lousy scholarship by eBay's lawyers, both in the use of the 97% number and in omitting Webster's name. See also
http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2006/01/gross-error-in-ebay-brief-to-supreme.html
The CAFC does not have a per se rule for granting injunctions. In the MercExchange case, the CAFC referred to exceptional circumstances. In previous cases, the CAFC referred to special reasons. Separately, no one seems to have presented any good reasons for overruling the 1908 case, Continental Paper.
February 18, 2006
0 replies