Saurabh Vishnubhakat

Page

Saurabh Vishnubhakat writes and teaches on intellectual property law, civil procedure, and administrative law, particularly from an empirical perspective.

Curriculum Vitae

Curriculum Vitae

Texas A&M Law Duke Law SSRN Twitter LinkedIn Twitter

Current Appointments

Texas A&M University
Associate Professor, School of Law
Associate Professor, College of Engineering

Duke University
Fellow, Duke Law Center for Innovation Policy

Prior Experience

Duke University
Faculty Fellow, Duke Law Center for Innovation Policy
Postdoctoral Associate, Duke Center for Public Genomics

United States Patent and Trademark Office
Expert Advisor, Office of Chief Economist
Attorney Advisor, Office of Chief Economist

Articles

Except as otherwise stated, these papers reflect only the views of the author(s).

The Antitrusting of Patentability
48 Seton Hall L. Rev. (forthcoming)

The Field of Invention
45 Hofstra L. Rev. 899 (2017)

An Intentional Tort Theory of Patents
68 Fla. L. Rev. 571 (2016)

Strategic Decision Making in Dual PTAB and District Court Proceedings
31 Berkeley. Tech. L.J. 45 (2016) (w/ Arti Rai & Jay Kesan)

When Biopharma Meets Software: Bioinformatics at the Patent Office
29 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 205 (2015) (w/ Arti Rai)

The USPTO Patent Pro Bono Program
7 Cybaris: Intell. Prop. L. Rev. 1 (2015) (w/ Jennifer McDowell)

What's It Worth to Keep a Secret?
13 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 116 (2015) (w/ Gavin Reid & Nicola Searle)

The Mouse That Trolled
2 J.L. & Biosci. (2015) (w/ Tania Bubela & Robert Cook-Deegan) (peer-reviewed)

Expired Patents
64 Cath. U. L. Rev. 419 (2015)

Gender Diversity in the Patent Bar
14 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 67 (2014)

Certain Patents
16 Yale J.L. & Tech. 103 (2013) (w/ Alan Marco)

Of Smart Phone Wars and Software Patents
27 J. Econ. Persp. 67 (2013) (w/ Stuart Graham) (peer-reviewed)

Pre-Service Removal in the Forum Defendant's Arsenal
47 Gonz. L. Rev. 147 (2011)

Reconceiving the Patent Rocket Docket
11 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. 58 (2011)

Books & Book Chapters

A Tort Theory of Patent Litigation: History and Reform (Cambridge University Press, in progress)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (w/ Arti Rai & Jay Kesan)
in Research Handbook on the Economics of Intellectual Property Law, Vol. II: Analytical Methods (Peter Menell & David L. Schwartz, eds.) (Edward Elgar Publishing, forthcoming)

Shorter Pieces & Commentaries

Court-Agency Allocations of Power and the Limits of Cuozzo
PatentlyO (May 5, 2017)

The Youngest Patent Validity Proceeding: Evaluating Post-Grant Review
24 Tex. Intell. Prop. L.J. 333 (2016)

Precedent and Process in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
PatentlyO (May 10, 2016)

Ariosa v. Sequenom: In Search of Yes After a Decade of No
Nat'l L. Rev. (Dec. 4, 2015)

Commil v. Cisco and the Tort of Patent Infringement
Invited Post on the Written Description Blog (Dec. 9, 2014)

Cognitive Economy and the Trespass Fallacy: A Response to Professor Mossoff
65 Fla. L. Rev. Forum 38 (2014)

The Growing Public Domain in Medicine
15 Colum. Sci. & Tech. L. Rev. 293 (2014)

What Patent Attorney Fee Awards Really Look Like
63 Duke L.J. Online 15 (2014)

Protecting the Public from Itself: The Unconstitutional ‘Say No to Drug Ads’ Act
25 WLF Legal Backgrounder, No. 7 (2010)

Public Talks & Media Appearances

John Marshall IP Lecture Series, Patent Mistakes in the Administrative State (January 31, 2017)

USPTO-Duke-Santa Clara Patent Quality Conference (December 13, 2016)

Chicago-Kent Supreme Court IP Review, Commil v. Cisco (September 25, 2015)

Duke Law Innovation Policy Roundtable on the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board, The USPTO vs. the Courts (June 3, 2015)

Duke Law Innovation Policy Roundtable on the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Post-Grant Review vs. Initial Examination (June 3, 2015)

American University Supreme Court Series, Commil v. Cisco (March. 31, 2015)

This Week in Law, No. 295 (March. 6, 2015)

Briefs & Public Filings—Principal or Contributing Author

Except as otherwise stated, these briefs reflect only the views of the author(s).

Brief of Amici Curiae Brief of Amici Curiae Professors of Patent and Administrative Law in Support of Neither Party, Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corporation
Nos. 15–1944, –1945, –1946 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 23, 2017)

Brief of Amici Curiae First Amendment Scholars & First Amendment Lawyers Association in Support of Petitioners, Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman
No. 15–1391 (Sup. Ct., Nov. 21, 2016)

Comment to the SEC in Support of the Enhanced Disclosure of Patent and Technology License Information, Concept Release: Business and Financial Disclosure Required by Regulation S-K
File No. S7–06–16 (Sec. Exch. Comm’n, July 22, 2016)

Brief of Amici Curiae First Amendment Scholars in Support of Petitioners, Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman
No. 15–1391 (Sup. Ct., June 15, 2016)

Brief of Professor Saurabh Vishnubhakat as Amicus Curiae in Support of Respondent, Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
No. 13–896 (Sup. Ct., Feb. 26, 2015)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Franklin Pierce Law Center on En Banc Rehearing in Support of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Hyatt v. Kappos
No. 2007–1066 (Fed. Cir., May 24, 2010) (w/ Pierce Law IP Amicus Brief Clinic)

Briefs & Public Filings—Cosignatory

Except as otherwise stated, these briefs reflect only the views of the author(s).

Brief of 44 Law, Economics and Business Professors As Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent, Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc.
No. 15–1189 (Sup. Ct., Feb. 23, 2017)

Brief of 11 Law Professors As Amici Curiae Brief in Support of Appellant, Converse, Inc. v. International Trade Commission
No. 15–2497 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 3, 2017)

Brief of Amici Curiae First Amendment Scholars and Legal Organizations in Support of Plaintiff IMDb.com, Inc.’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction, IMDb.com v. Harris
No. 3:16–cv–06535–VC (N.D. Cal., Jan. 12, 2017)

Brief of 19 Law Professors as Amici Curiae in Support of Petition for a Writ of Certiorari, Sequenom, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., et al.
No. 15–1182 (Sup. Ct., Apr. 20, 2016)

Brief of Amicus Curiae Twenty-Three Law Professors in Support of Appellants’ Petition for Rehearing En Banc, Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., et al. v. Sequenom, Inc., et al.
Nos. 2014–1139, 2014–1144 (Fed. Cir., Aug. 27, 2015)