專(zhuān)利訴訟外文翻譯----法律和事實(shí)在專(zhuān)利訴訟中是形式還是功能.doc
約7頁(yè)DOC格式手機(jī)打開(kāi)展開(kāi)
專(zhuān)利訴訟外文翻譯----法律和事實(shí)在專(zhuān)利訴訟中是形式還是功能,recently, the supreme court sent dennison mfg. v. panduit corp. back to the court of appeals for the federal circuit (cafc). it remanded with explicit direction...
內(nèi)容介紹
此文檔由會(huì)員 wanli1988go 發(fā)布
Recently, the Supreme Court sent Dennison Mfg. v. Panduit Corp. back to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). It remanded with explicit directions that the lower court consider the extent to which Fed. R. Civ. P. 52(a) governs appellate review of nonobviousness determinations.
介紹：
最近，最高法院駁回了丹尼森Mfg.訴泛達(dá)公司的案件至聯(lián)邦巡回法院（CAFC）。它的駁回帶有鮮明的特征，即在考慮了《美國(guó)聯(lián)邦民法》第52頁(yè)中所規(guī)定的審查基層法院上訴的非顯而易見(jiàn)的程度后才發(fā)回重審。
On remand, the CAFC should attempt to relate the issue to the scope of review for other issues that arise in patent appeals. Neither the narrow nor the broad problem has ever received the attention it deserves — particularly from the standpoint of the fundamental law/fact dichotomy.
在發(fā)回重審時(shí)，聯(lián)邦巡回法院應(yīng)該嘗試在專(zhuān)利上訴時(shí)聯(lián)系它的復(fù)審范圍。但是無(wú)論是狹義還是廣義的問(wèn)題都沒(méi)有得到它應(yīng)有的重視——特別是基本的法律/ 事實(shí)二分法上的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。
介紹：
最近，最高法院駁回了丹尼森Mfg.訴泛達(dá)公司的案件至聯(lián)邦巡回法院（CAFC）。它的駁回帶有鮮明的特征，即在考慮了《美國(guó)聯(lián)邦民法》第52頁(yè)中所規(guī)定的審查基層法院上訴的非顯而易見(jiàn)的程度后才發(fā)回重審。
On remand, the CAFC should attempt to relate the issue to the scope of review for other issues that arise in patent appeals. Neither the narrow nor the broad problem has ever received the attention it deserves — particularly from the standpoint of the fundamental law/fact dichotomy.
在發(fā)回重審時(shí)，聯(lián)邦巡回法院應(yīng)該嘗試在專(zhuān)利上訴時(shí)聯(lián)系它的復(fù)審范圍。但是無(wú)論是狹義還是廣義的問(wèn)題都沒(méi)有得到它應(yīng)有的重視——特別是基本的法律/ 事實(shí)二分法上的觀(guān)點(diǎn)。
