2009
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1372366
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Study of the Role and Impact of Special Masters in Patent Cases

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As Kesan & Ball argue, there are four main arguments as to why one may want to specialize: 1) development of "judicial human capital,"; 2) fostering of uniformity and consistent precedent; 3) the impact specialization has on the "political economy of the legal system" and 4) increasing the efficiency of trial court management. 70 The argument for specialization may be especially strong with respect to complex matters like patent litigation, where, as Rochelle Dreyfuss notes, "[t]he more intricate the law, the more likely it is that a generalist will get things wrong, confuse matters and encourage additional litigation." 71 A specialist court may be better able to gauge the nuances behind bright line rules and thus better understand the circumstances under which correctness subsumes to convenience.…”
Section: A Arguments For and Against Specialized Trial Courtsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As Kesan & Ball argue, there are four main arguments as to why one may want to specialize: 1) development of "judicial human capital,"; 2) fostering of uniformity and consistent precedent; 3) the impact specialization has on the "political economy of the legal system" and 4) increasing the efficiency of trial court management. 70 The argument for specialization may be especially strong with respect to complex matters like patent litigation, where, as Rochelle Dreyfuss notes, "[t]he more intricate the law, the more likely it is that a generalist will get things wrong, confuse matters and encourage additional litigation." 71 A specialist court may be better able to gauge the nuances behind bright line rules and thus better understand the circumstances under which correctness subsumes to convenience.…”
Section: A Arguments For and Against Specialized Trial Courtsmentioning
confidence: 99%