Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/81782
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor科管智財所
dc.creator陳秉訓zh_TW
dc.creatorChen, Ping-Hsun
dc.date2014-06
dc.date.accessioned2016-03-02T08:46:24Z-
dc.date.available2016-03-02T08:46:24Z-
dc.date.issued2016-03-02T08:46:24Z-
dc.identifier.urihttp://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/81782-
dc.description.abstractExpert witnesses serve an important role in United States patent litigation. Patent litigation often involves complex technological issues. Technical experts are needed to help a judge interpret claim language or to assist a jury to understand patented technology or infringing products. When resolving the patentability issues, such as anticipation and obviousness, technical experts are good consultants for factfinders. Additionally, damages calculation requires knowledge of industries and financial or accounting theories. Damages experts must get in to resolve the issues of monetary remedies. While expert witnesses play an important role in patent litigation, fewer studies explore the relevant case law about the qualification of experts or the admissibility of expert opinions. So, this paper is intended to address Federal Circuit case law regarding those issues. While Title 35 of the United States Code speaks nothing about expert witnesses, Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence is the only statutory basis for the requirements of qualified experts. In this paper, the case law review begins by examining the judicial interpretation of Rule 702. Three U.S. Supreme Court cases and several Federal Circuit cases will be analyzed. Then, this paper focuses on two categories of experts: technical experts and damages experts. Cases related to either category will be discussed. While Rule 702 requires an expert to have “scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge,” it is opt to a district court judge to admit or exclude expert witnesses or expert opinions as evidence heard by a jury. Besides, the Federal Circuit’s review standard is an abuse of discretion. So, a district court judge usually has much leeway. Furthermore, based on the analysis of the Federal Circuit cases, this article provides legal principles or propositions related to expert testimony.
dc.format.extent376487 bytes-
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf-
dc.relation科技法學評論, 11(1), 155-220
dc.subjectNonobviousness ; Patent Litigation ; Expert Witness ; Rules of Evidence ; Damages Calculation
dc.titleQualification of Expert Witnesses in United States Patent Litigation: A Review of Federal Circuit Case Law Regarding Rule 702 of the Federal Rules of Evidence
dc.title.alternative論美國專利訴訟之專家證人資格─以美國聯邦巡迴上訴法院與聯邦證據規則第702條有關之判決為中心
dc.typearticle
dc.identifier.doi10.3966/181130952014061101005
dc.doi.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.3966/181130952014061101005
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
Appears in Collections:期刊論文
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
407255.pdf367.66 kBAdobe PDF2View/Open
Show simple item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.