Ciba-Geigy Corp. V. Alza Corp)
5.2.1 Standing
In law, standing is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. When it comes to the right of standing in cases related to patented technology, it becomes more complicated than just being able to prove that the infringement harms the party, he should also have all the rights of the patented technology to be eligible to sue.
Let us suppose a researcher patents a new technology. Sensing its usefulness in industry, the licensor grants to a major corporation an exclusive license of his patented technology the licensor also includes a clause in the license agreement that allows the licensee to …show more content…
v. Alza Corp., the court found independent standing as the licensee had completely unrestricted rights to sue for infringement. The licensor, University of California, gave an exclusive license to Ciba-Geigy. Alza claimed that Ciba-Geigy lacked standing, but this was rejected by the court because not only did the licensor give the licensee the right to sue infringers, they also agreed to not file any infringement suits of its own. The licensee was allowed to pursue the litigation without absolutely any participation whatsoever from the licensor, and thus had all substantial rights required to independently stand in …show more content…
This could include factors like limiting the duration of the license, limiting the field of use of the license, limiting the jurisdiction where the licensee can exercise these rights etc. This also includes the licensor reserving the right to use the patented technology himself, which would, in effect, not make the license completely exclusive. Requiring the licensee to ask for permission, or report to and inform the licensor also have an impact on
In law, standing is the term for the ability of a party to demonstrate to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that party's participation in the case. When it comes to the right of standing in cases related to patented technology, it becomes more complicated than just being able to prove that the infringement harms the party, he should also have all the rights of the patented technology to be eligible to sue.
Let us suppose a researcher patents a new technology. Sensing its usefulness in industry, the licensor grants to a major corporation an exclusive license of his patented technology the licensor also includes a clause in the license agreement that allows the licensee to …show more content…
v. Alza Corp., the court found independent standing as the licensee had completely unrestricted rights to sue for infringement. The licensor, University of California, gave an exclusive license to Ciba-Geigy. Alza claimed that Ciba-Geigy lacked standing, but this was rejected by the court because not only did the licensor give the licensee the right to sue infringers, they also agreed to not file any infringement suits of its own. The licensee was allowed to pursue the litigation without absolutely any participation whatsoever from the licensor, and thus had all substantial rights required to independently stand in …show more content…
This could include factors like limiting the duration of the license, limiting the field of use of the license, limiting the jurisdiction where the licensee can exercise these rights etc. This also includes the licensor reserving the right to use the patented technology himself, which would, in effect, not make the license completely exclusive. Requiring the licensee to ask for permission, or report to and inform the licensor also have an impact on