No Patent for Like-Kind Investment Strategy

May 2012
Federal Tax Course Letter;May2012, Vol. 26 Issue 5, p7
Trade Publication
The article discusses a court case Fort Properties, Inc. vs. American Master Lease LLC in the U.S. It is stated that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected a taxpayer's attempt to patent like-kind investment strategy. The Federal Circuit held that like-kind exchanges was an investment strategy that was ineligible for a patent.


Related Articles

  • False Filings. Seidenberg, Steven // InsideCounsel;Apr2011, Vol. 22 Issue 232, p22 

    The article talks about lawsuits that are being filed against companies in the U.S. for marking their products with inaccurate or expired patent numbers, which is said to violate the false patent marking statute. It places emphasis on pending decision in FLFMC LLC v. Wham-O Inc. which is...

  • FORUM SHOPPING AND VENUE TRANSFER IN PATENT CASES: MARSHALL'S RESPONSE TO TS TECH AND GENENTECH. Offin-Brown, Elizabeth P. // Berkeley Technology Law Journal;2010 Annual Review, Vol. 25 Issue 1, p61 

    The article discusses a court case in which U.S. Federal Circuit issued a ruling granting a writ of mandamus for venue transfer out of the Eastern District of Texas. The federal court explains the venue transfer rules, introduces the concept of forum shopping between the fedral district courts...

  • PATENT INFRINGEMENT AND PERSONAL JURISDICTION.  // Berkeley Technology Law Journal;2010 Annual Review, Vol. 25 Issue 1, p210 

    The article discusses two court cases informing U.S. Federal Circuit's decision regarding jurisdiction in patent infringement. It informs about Medical Solutions (MSI), Inc. v. C. Chang Surgical (CCS) LLC case in which district court rejected MSI's argument stating that MSI failed to make a...

  • Ramifications of Joint Infringement Theory on Emerging Technology Patents. Robinson, W. Keith // Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal;Spring2010, Vol. 18 Issue 2, p335 

    The article discusses the impact of joint infringement theory on technology patents in the U.S. The author explains that the theory applies when an asserted claim requires multiple actors. He cites two cases decided by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit which represent the standards...

  • Unrepresentative Randomization: An Empirical Study of Judging Panels of USPTO Appeals to the CAFC. Froats, Thomas // Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal;Summer2010, Vol. 19 Issue 1, p79 

    The article presents an empirical study which examines the judging panels of United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Appeals to United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) to determine if there is a truly representative cross section of judges involved in those...

  • The New Rules: What the Federal Circuit's Tecom II Decision Means for Contractor Litigation Strategy and Recovery of Legal Costs. Lemmer, Thomas A.; Menlove, Taylor M.; Bareis, Tyson J. // Procurement Lawyer;Fall2009, Vol. 45 Issue 1, p10 

    The article discusses the aspects of the Tecom II decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Two types of costs are identified which include the cost of legal services linked with the defense costs and the settlement costs. It is noted that the Federal Circuit has...

  • Appeals court backs verdict in Medtronic-Depuy case.  // Medical Device Daily;6/4/2009, Vol. 13 Issue 106, p10 

    The article reports that the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals supported the previous decision on the December 2007 patent infringement case involving Medtronic and DePuy Spine. The appeals court ruled that there was patent infringement although part of the damages, $77.2 million, awarded to DePuy...

  • Patenting biotech beyond the central dogma. Wu, George // Nature Biotechnology;Mar2010, Vol. 28 Issue 3, p230 

    The article discusses the new interpretations of the legal scope of patentability by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC). The requirements for patent application in the country are cited including the novelty of the invention noted in the case In re Bilski. The case In re...

  • PAICE YOURSELVES: A BASIC FRAMEWORK FOR ONGOING ROYALTY DETERMINATIONS IN PATENT LAW. Ullmer, Stephen M. // Berkeley Technology Law Journal;2009 Annual Review, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p75 

    The article reports on several cases of patent infringement at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. It discusses the legal landscape of the court's cases involving ongoing royalties. It also presents the cases of Carlos Armando Amado v. Microsoft Corp. and Paice LLC v. Toyota Motor...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics