保罗Gugliuzza共同撰写了反对联邦巡回法院澳门威尼斯人注册专利案件属人管辖权的规则的法庭之友摘要

Gugliuzza drafted a brief in 阿尔特拉公司诉Papst许可案, submitted to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

保罗Gugliuzza, associate professor of law at 波士顿大学法学院, 最近向美国联邦巡回上诉法院提交了一份法庭之友简报 in support of the appellants in 阿尔特拉公司诉Papst许可案. Coauthors included 豪尔赫·康特拉斯 from the University of Utah College of Law and 梅根·拉贝尔 from the Catholic University of America Columbus 法学院. 另外31位具有民事诉讼和专利法专业知识的法学教授也加入了诉状，Simpson Thatcher和Bartlett律师事务所的几位律师协助准备和提交了诉状。

这起案件的起因是，一家专门从事获取和执行专利的德国公司Papst Licensing向加利福尼亚州的阿尔特拉公司发出了停止函，声称阿尔特拉侵犯了Papst在计算机存储设备测试方法上的专利。 阿尔特拉向加州联邦地区法院提起诉讼，要求法院作出宣告性判决，认定派派特的专利无效，阿尔特拉没有侵犯这些专利。 The district court dismissed the case based on the Federal Circuit’s 1998 decision in 红翼鞋业公司诉Hockerson-Halberstadt公司案。 in which the court held that cease and desist letters and unsuccessful licensing negotiations, on their own, can never establish the “minimum contacts” required for courts to exercise personal jurisdiction over a patent holder. The rationale offered by the Federal Circuit in 红翼鞋 was that demand letters and licensing negotiations facilitate out-of-court dispute resolution and that subjecting a patent holder to jurisdiction based on those letters or negotiations would inhibit the settlement process.

Gugliuzza和他的合著者撰写的摘要支持阿尔特拉对驳回该案的决定的上诉，并认为联邦巡回法院应该重新审视其限制专利案件管辖权的一揽子规则。 Gugliuzza说：“联邦巡回法院的假设是，停止和停止信函总是为了避免诉讼，这是不正确的。”他指出，一些专利持有人使用停止和停止信函只是为了快速收取许可费用，而不是作为诉讼的前兆。 “不应该有一个明确的管辖规则，而应该是逐案分析。”

诉状认为，根据美国最高法院的相关判例法，禁止函和许可谈判等执法活动可以提供建立属人管辖权所需的最低限度的联系。 此外，最高法院强调，对属人管辖权的分析是一种逐案、具体接触的分析。 “The Federal Circuit’s decision in 红翼鞋 has always struck me as wrong as a matter of legal doctrine,” Gugliuzza says. “从政策角度来看，这也令人不安，因为在专利诉讼的选择范围上存在巨大差异。 Because of 红翼鞋, alleged infringers have very few options for where they can file declaratory judgment suits.” On the other hand, another line of Federal Circuit case law (not at issue in the 阿尔特拉 case) allows patent holders to file infringement suits practically anywhere the alleged infringer is selling its products.

另外两份法庭之友意见书是由消费者权益倡导者和经常收到许可要求的公司提交给法院的，它们与古格鲁扎和他的合著者讨论了同样的问题，指出人们普遍认为联邦巡回法院需要重新审视其司法管辖法。 To overturn its prior precedent, the court would likely have to hear the 阿尔特拉 case 在银, rather than in front of the three-judge panel that is currently considering it. But, Gugliuzza says, “this case presents an ideal opportunity for the Federal Circuit convene 在银, overturn its previous decisions, and adopt the case by case analysis we suggest.”

Gugliuzza教授的奖学金长期以来一直专注于专利法和民事诉讼程序的交叉。 法庭之友简报就是这种与现实世界冲突的一个例子。 In February 2015, 他被传唤到国会小组委员会作证 regarding the widespread use of demand letters by patent trolls. His recent essay, “Patent Litigation Reform: The Courts, Congress, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,” was published in 波士顿大学法律评论.