The Federal Circuit's use of laches in patent enforcement has been undermined by Supreme Court rulings that emphasize statute-specific timeliness. Laches is a gap-filling doctrine used only when statute gaps exist. The Patent Act outlines clear timeliness rules, and where Congress has specified these requirements, invoking laches could exceed judicial authority. The Act mandates responses to USPTO actions within six months, leaving no gaps for laches application, despite potential undesirable policy outcomes arising from this limitation.
The equitable doctrine of laches could bar enforcement of a patent after unreasonable delay in prosecution, but reliance on it has become questionable due to Supreme Court rulings.
Laches serves as a gap-filling doctrine, which cannot be applied where Congress has provided specific statutory requirements regarding timeliness in patent applications.
The Patent Act clearly outlines various timeliness requirements, including a six-month response period for applicants, eliminating gaps that could warrant the use of laches.
Judicial application of laches in patent cases risks overriding Congressional intent regarding timeliness, even if this leads to policy outcomes that judges may find undesirable.
Collection
[
|
...
]