On-Demand   MP3 Audio
  Also Available in:  On-Demand On-Demand One-Hour Briefing

State of Exhaustion After Supreme Court's Impression Products v. Lexmark - What Impact on Structuring Sales and Licensing Transactions?

Recorded on: Jun. 28, 2017
Running Time: 01:08:45
Taken from the briefing State of Exhaustion After Supreme Court's Impression Products v. Lexmark - What Impact on Structuring Sales and Licensing Transactions? recorded June 2017 in New York.

On May 31, 2017, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Int’l, Inc. In Impression Products the Court granted review on two questions related to the patent exhaustion doctrine, which holds that the initial authorized sale of a patented item terminates all patent rights to that item. The questions presented were:

1. Whether a sale that transfers title to the patented item while specifying post-sale restrictions on the article’s use or resale avoids application of the patent exhaustion doctrine and therefore permits the enforcement of such post-sale restrictions through the patent law’s infringement remedy, and

2. Whether, in light of the holding in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 1351, 1363 (2016) that the common law doctrine barring restraints on alienation that is the basis of exhaustion doctrine “makes no geographical distinctions,” a sale of a patented article – authorized by the U.S. patentee – that takes place outside of the United States exhausts the U.S. patent rights in that article.

In an opinion viewed by some as “pro-consumer” and “pro-competitive” (see, e.g. “The Supreme Court Just Bolstered Your Right To Repair Stuff,” Wired Magazine, June 2, 2017), but by others as likely to result in higher prices and/or reduced product availability (see, e.g., "Patent Exhaustion at the Supreme Court: Industry Reaction to Impression Products v. Lexmark", ipwatchdog.com, May 30, 2017), the Court (again) reversed the Federal Circuit and held "that a patentee's decision to sell a product exhausts all of its patent rights in that item, regardless of any restrictions the patentee purports to impose or the location of the sale." Further expanding the impact of a first sale, the Court also held that exhaustion occurs as a result of the fact of a sale, not the location of a sale. “[T]he patentee elects to give up title to an item in exchange for payment.” Patent rights cannot continue to attach to a good as it flows through a market post sale. The implications of this Opinion will be significant across many industries.

Lecture Topics [01:08:45]

Please listen to Ira Jay Levy of Goodwin Procter LLP and Joseph Yang of PatentEsque Law Group, LLP, long-time co-chairs of the PLI Advanced Licensing Agreements Program, in a discussion concerning the:

  • Background of patent exhaustion
  • Real world impact of exhaustion pre-Lexmark
  • Lexmark case:
    • Lead up to the Supreme Court
    • Supreme Court opinion
  • Real world impact of Lexmark
    • What does it mean for IP transactions?
    • What does it mean for existing agreements?
  • What’s next for patent exhaustion?

Presentation Material

  • Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc.
    Ira Jay Levy, Joseph Yang
  • The State of Exhaustion After Supreme Court's Impression Products v. Lexmark - What Impact on Structuring Sales and Licensing Transactions?
    Ira Jay Levy, Joseph Yang
Speaker(s)
Ira Jay Levy ~ Goodwin Procter LLP
Joseph Yang ~ PatentEsque Law Group, LLP
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017,  all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments do not qualify for credit.

Iowa:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New Jersey:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional MP3 audio segments can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional MP3 audio segments. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via MP3 audio segments.

North Carolina:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “non-traditional” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of non-traditional programs per reporting period.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 3on-demand credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via MP3 audio segments.

Wyoming:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6credits of self-study per reporting period.

CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits on MP3 audio segments vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select MP3 audio segments qualify as “QAS Self-Study” credit. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s MP3 audio segments may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s MP3 audio segments may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

 

Share
Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2017 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2017 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.