US Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg's Legendary Man

9Month19According to Reuters,BBCAnd many other foreign media reported that the United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died, all year round.87Years old.

It is reported that Ginsburg13He developed fever and other symptoms on the evening of the day and underwent initial examination at Sibley Memorial Hospital in Washington, D. C.14He was transferred to Johns Hopkins Hospital on the same day. In fact, this year7In January, Ginsburg announced that the cancer had returned. The death of Justice Ginsberg caused a sensation throughout the United States. Not only did thousands of people spontaneously come to the door of the U.S. Supreme Court to express their condolences, but the White House also lowered the flag at half-mast to express their condolences.

The Legendary Life of US Justice Ginsburg

1933Ginsburg was born in Brooklyn, New York. According to her, her father was a first-generation immigrant to the United States, and her mother barely counted as a second-generation immigrant to the United States. Ginsberg's mother, though unable to go back to school after finishing Senior high school for family reasons, was full of wisdom. Ginsburg's mother gave her two words: to be a lady and live independently. Unfortunately, when Ginsburg graduated from Senior high school, her mother died of cancer.

After that, Ginsburg went to Cornell University on a scholarship. She met her husband, Martin, at Cornell University. They were engaged in their junior year and married after graduation. After graduating from college, because her husband was called up, Ginsburg also followed her husband to Oklahoma. During this period, she found a job as a subsidy examiner in the local Social Security Department. The level was5Level. However, when she informed the personnel department of her pregnancy, she was assigned to work as a clerk and was downgraded2Level. After her husband retired, Ginsburg and her husband Martin entered Harvard Law School. After her husband Martin graduated, he found a job at a New York law firm. Ginsberg also transferred to Columbia University to continue his studies with her husband. But even if Ginsburg graduated first honors, she still couldn't find a law firm in New York after graduation.Lawyer'sThe reason is that law firms in New York don't hire women.

1963She went to Rutgers University as a professor of law. Later, at the request of the students, a new one was added.“Gender and the Law”Course.In the course of teaching, Ginsburg learned that there are many gender discrimination provisions in American law, and she also understood more and more that as a woman, discrimination is everywhere.1972In 2010, she established the women's rights project under the famous American civil rights organization "American Civil Liberties Union" and began a ten-year litigation process. She was involved in more300In cases of gender discrimination, there are6The case went to the U.S. Supreme Court and she won.5pieces.

1993Ginsburg was nominated and appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court by Clinton, but she did not stopThe footsteps of women fighting for equal rights.1996A female student wanted to apply for the Virginia Military Academy, but was told that the college would not admit female cadets. The case was finally appealed to the Supreme Court. In the judgment of Ginsberg's chief writer, it was emphasized that women should not be denied the ability and perseverance to receive military training at Virginia Academy just because of gender conditions. The policy of gender restriction must be subject to strict The review has won the qualification for women to enter the Virginia Military Institute. Through one case after another, she changed the sex discrimination clause in the United States, and also constructed the concept of women's equal rights in people's minds.

Justice Ginsburg's unique insight into patent law

People regard Ginsburg as an equal rights fighter who insists on justice, but she also has her own unique views on patent law.

2014Year4in the U.S. Supreme Court.Nautilus, Inc.case. The dispute in the case is mainly around the U.S. Patent Act.112Article2The provisions of the paragraph are expanded, and the clause stipulates that the patent specification must "make one or more specifically stated and clearly stated claims, the object of which is the invention identified by the applicant". How to interpret the clear and unambiguous requirements mentioned in the clause has become the focus of the dispute in the case. The Supreme Court6Judge Ginsburg wrote the unanimous opinion on behalf of the court. In his ruling, Justice Ginsberg wrote: "Both parties in this case agreed that the clarity of the patent claim should be determined from the perspective of those who have knowledge of the relevant technical field; that it should be interpreted in accordance with the specification and the patent application process; and that the time of the patent application should be used as the time standard for the determination. But what the parties failed to agree on was112Article2What is the degree of ambiguity that can be tolerated. Section112The requirement of clarity set out in the article must take into account the inherent limitations of language. On the other hand, a certain degree of uncertainty is "the price of ensuring appropriate incentives for innovation"; patents are not written for lawyers, or even for the general public, but for technicians in related fields. At the same time, a patent must clearly publicize the scope of the claims it claims, so as to inform others of the areas that should be avoided. The standard used here is to require clarity, but at the same time recognize that absolute clarity is impossible to achieve. This is also consistent with the previous opinion of the Supreme Law, which requires certainty of patent rights based on the object of the invention, but not more than a reasonable degree.

2017Year3in the U.S. Supreme Court.Impression Products,Inc.v. Lexmark International Inc.case. The focus of the dispute is whether the patent exhaustion rule applies to overseas sales and parallel imports. Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts wrote the court's opinion, and Justice Ginsburg wrote the partially coordinated and partially dissenting opinion. Justice Roberts, the lead author, held that after the patentee decided to sell his product, regardless of whether there were contractual restrictions or whether the sale occurred abroad, the patent rights on the product were exhausted. Patent rights should be subject to common law principles prohibiting restrictions on the transfer of goods. The purpose of patent law is to enable the patentee to receive economic returns to promote innovation, and once the patentee sells his product, the patentee has already received an economic return; moreover, the patent law does not provide any basis for restricting the use and benefits of the product. Justice Ginsburg agreed with the court's decision on domestic exhaustion-that where a patentee sells a product that has an express restriction on reuse or resale, that restriction may not be enforced through an infringement action because sales in the United States exhaust the United States patent rights of the product sold. But Justice Ginsburg disagreed with the court's decision on international exhaustion, arguing that overseas sales did not mean exhaustion of the patent rights of American inventors in the United States. In her dissenting opinion, she referred to patent law as territorial law. When an inventor is granted a US patent, the patent offers no protection abroad. S. patentee must apply to each country where he seeks exclusive rights to sell his invention. Moreover, patent laws vary from country to country, and each country may have different laws regarding the relative rights of inventors, competitors, and the public in patented inventions. Because overseas sales operate independently of the U.S. patent system, it makes no sense to say that such sales deplete the inventor's U.S. patent rights.