The Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law: Competition, Antitrust, and Patents

doi:10.1017/9781316416723

References

Cases

United States

A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co., 960 F.2d 1020 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (en banc).
Abbott Labs. v. Sandoz, Inc., 500 F. Supp. 2d 846 (N.D. Ill. 2007).
Abbott Labs. v. Sandoz, Inc., 533 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Commc’ns., Inc., 694 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Acumed LLC v. Stryker Corp., 551 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Addamax Corp. v. Open Software Found., Inc., 888 F. Supp. 274 (D. Mass. 1995).
Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. Indian Head, Inc., 486 U.S. 492 (1988).
Am. Inst. of Intradermal Cosmetics, Inc. v. Soc’y of Permanent Cosmetic Prof’ls, CV 12–06887 GAF (JCGx), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58138 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 16, 2013).
Am. Soc’y of Sanitation Eng’ing, No. C-3169, 106 F.T.C. 324, 324 ¶ 2 (1985).
Amado v. Microsoft Corp., 517 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
American Soc’y of Mechanical Engineers v. Hydrolevel Corp., 456 U.S. 556 (1982).
Amoco Prod. Co. v. Gambell, 480 U.S. 531 (1987).
Apple Inc. v. Acacia Research, et al. (N.D. Cal., case number 5:16-cv-07266, filed December 20, 2016).
Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 757 F.3d 1286 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 678 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 695 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 735 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 809 F.3d 633 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72745 (W.D. Wis. 2011).
Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc., 886 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (W.D. Wis. 2012).
Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 869 F. Supp. 2d 901 (N.D. Ill. 2012).
Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., No. 11-cv-01846, 2012 WL 1672493 (N.D. Cal. May 14, 2012).
Atari Games Corp. v. Nintendo of Am., Inc., 897 F.2d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Automated Merchandising System, Inc. v. Crane Co., 357 F. App’x 297 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. v. W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc., 670 F.3d 1171 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Basic, Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988).
Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. Technical Dev. Corp., 433 F.2d 55 (7th Cir. 1970).
Breaux Bros. Farms, Inc. v. Teche Sugar Co., 21 F.3d 83 (5th Cir. 1994).
Broad. Music, Inc. v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc., 441 U.S. 1 (1979).
Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., 501 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2007).
Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., 543 F.3d 683 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 05-3350 (MLC), 2006 WL 2528525 (D.N.J. Aug. 31, 2006).
Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 (1962).
Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl–O–Mat, Inc., 429 U.S. 477 (1977).
C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Sys., Inc., 157 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 1998).
Cal. Dental Ass’n v. FTC, 536 U.S. 780,781 (1999).
Cal. Motor Transp. Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508 (1972).
Cascades Comput. Innovation LLC v. RPX Corp., No. 12-cv-01143-YGR, 2016 WL 705982 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2016).
Cascades Comput. Innovation LLC v. RPX Corp., No. 12–CV–1143 YGR, 2013 WL 6247594 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2013).
Catalano, Inc. v. Target Sales, Inc., 446 U.S. 643, 647 (1980).
CBS v. ASCAP, 620 F.2d 930 (2d Cir. 1980).
In re Certain Alkaline Batteries, Inv. No. 337-TA-165, USITC Pub. No. 1616 (Nov. 1984) (Final), aff’d, Duracell Inc. v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 778 F.2d 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1985).
In re Certain Baseband Processor Chips & Chipsets, Transmitter & Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control, 337-TA-543 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).
In re Certain Dynamic Random Access Memories, Inv. No. 337-TA-242 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n Nov. 1987).
In re Certain Elec. Devices, Including Wireless Commc’n Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computs., No. 337-TA-794, 2013 WL 2453722 (Int’l Trade Comm’n June 4, 2013).
In re Certain Molded-In Sandwich Panel Inserts and Methods for their Installation, Inv. No. 337-TA-99 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n May 1982).
In re Certain Optoelectronic Devices for Fiber Optic Communications, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-860 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n May 9, 2014).
In re Certain Recordable Compact Discs & Rewritable Compact Discs, 2004 ITC LEXIS 990, Inv. No. 337-TA-474 (Int’l Trade Comm’n Mar. 25, 2004).
In re Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipe and Tube, Inv. No. 337-TA-29 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n Feb. 22, 1978).
In re Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-868 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n June 13, 2014).
In re Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337- TA-800 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).
In re Certain Wireless Standard Compliant Electronic Devices, Including Communication Devices and Tablet Computers Inv. No. 337-TA-953 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).
China Trade and Dev. Corp v. M. V. Choong Yong, 837 F.2d 33 (2d Cir. 1987).
In re Chips & Prods. Containing Same, Including Cellular Tel. Handsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-543 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).
ChriMar Sys., Inc v. Cisco Sys., Inc, 72 F. Supp. 3d 1012 (N.D. Cal. 2014).
In re Circuit Breaker Litig., 984 F. Supp. 1267 (C.D. Cal. 1997).
Clamp-All Corp. v. Cast Iron Soil Pipe Inst., 851 F.2d 478 (1st Cir. 1988).
Cole v. Cunningham, 133 U.S. 107 (1890).
Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc. v. Am. Soc. of Composers, 400 F. Supp. 737 (S.D.N.Y. 1975).
Commercial Credit Corp. v. Nelson Motors, Inc., 147 S.E.2d 481 (S.C. 1966).
Commercial Data Servers, Inc. v. IBM Corp., 262 F. Supp. 2d 50 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).
Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Org. v. Buffalo Tech., Inc., 492 F. Supp. 2d 600 (E.D. Tex. 2007).
Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Org. v. Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 809 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Org. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 6:11-cv-00343, 2014 WL 3805817 (E.D. Tex. July 23, 2014).
Consol. Metal Prods., Inc. v. Am. Petroleum Inst., 846 F.2d 284 (5th Cir. 1988).
Continental T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 U.S. 36 (1977).
Craftsmen Limousine, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 491 F.3d 380 (8th Cir. 2007).
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)
Delaware Coal. for Open Gov’t, Inc. v. Strine, 733 F.3d 510 (3d Cir. 2013).
In re Dell Computer Corp., 121 F.T.C. 616, 617 (1996).
DeLorme Publishing Co., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Com’n, 805 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 12, 2015).
Dig. Equip. Corp. v. Uniq Dig. Techs., Inc., 73 F.3d 756 (7th Cir. 1996).
Douglas Dynamics, LLC v. Buyers Prods. Co., 717 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
Duplan Corp. v. Deering Milliken, Inc., 444 F. Supp 648 (D.S.C. 1977).
E. & J. Gallo Winery v. Andina Licores S.A., 446 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2006).
E. Bement & Sons v. Nat’l Harrow Co., 186 U.S. 70 (1902).
E.R.R. Pres. Conf. v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 (1961).
Eastern R.R. Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 (1961).
eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. (U.S. 2006).
Edwards Lifesciences AG. v. Corevalve, Inc., 699 F.3d 1305 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Ericsson Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc., No. 6:10-cv-00473, 2013 WL 4046225 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 6, 2013).
Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc., 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
ESS Tech., Inc. v. PC-Tel., Inc., No. C-99-20292 RMW, 1999 WL 33520483, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 1999).
Ethyl Gasoline Corp. v. United States, 309 U.S. 436 (1940).
Found. for Interior Design Educ. Research v. Savannah Coll. of Art & Design, 244 F.3d 521, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2001).
FTC v. Actavis, Inc. 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013).
FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00220 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 2017).
FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 5:17- cv- 00220-LHK (N.D. Cal. June 26, 2017).
FTC v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co., 405 U.S. 233, 245 (1972).
FTC. v. Indiana Fed’n of Dentists, 476 U.S. 447 (1986).
Fujitsu Ltd. v. Netgear Inc., 620 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc. et vs. Tellabs, Inc. et al. (N.D. Ill. 2012).
Gage v. Riverside Trust Co., 86 F. 984, 986 (C.C.S.D. Cal. 1898).
Garretson v. Clark, 111 U.S. 120 (1884).
Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. U.S. Plywood-Champion Papers Inc., 446 F.2d 295 (2d Cir. 1971).
Georgia–Pacific Corp. v. U.S. Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970).
In re Geuns, 946 F.2d 845 (Fed. Cir. 1991).
Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 5:12–cv–04882–PSG, 2014 WL 2194501 (N.D. Cal. 2014).
Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 547 F.3d 266 (5th Cir. 2008).
Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Nokia, Inc., 416 F. Supp. 2d 525 (E.D. Tex. 2006).
Goss Int’l Corp. v. Man Roland Druckmaschinen Aktiengesellschaft, 491 F.3d 355 (8th Cir. 2007).
GPNE Corp. v. Apple, Inc., No.: 12–CV–02885–LHK, 2014 WL 1494247 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 16, 2014).
Grain Processing Corp. v. Am. Maize-Prods. Co., 185 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
GSI Technology Inc. v. Cypress Semiconductor Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2015).
Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386, 397–98 (1945–a).
Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386, 397–98 (1945–a).
Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 324 U.S. 570, 573 (1945–b).
Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (1895).
Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States, 238 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1956).
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 609 F. Supp. 2d 951 (N.D. Cal. 2009).
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 645 F.3d 1336, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 527 F. Supp. 2d 1084 (N.D. Cal. 2007).
i4i Ltd. P’ship v. Microsoft Corp., 598 F.3d 831 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Indep. Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28 (2006).
Image Technical Servs., Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 125 F.3d 1195 (9th Cir. 1997).
Impression Prods., Inc. v. Lexmark Int’l, Inc., 581 U.S. __ (2017),
Indep. Serv. Orgs. Antitrust Litig. v. Xerox Corp., 203 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2000).
In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC Patent Litig., No. 11 C 9308, 2013 WL 5593609, at *11 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 3, 2013–a).
In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC Patent Litigation, 956 F. Supp. 2d 925 (N.D. Ill. 2013–b).
Intel Corp., FTC Dkt. No. 9288 (June 8, 1998).
Intergraph Corp. v. Intel Corp., 195 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 1999).
Iwncomm v. Sony (2015) Jing Zhi Min Chu Zi No. 1194 (Beijing IP Court)
Jac USA, Inc. v. Precision Coated Prods., Inc., No. 00-3780, 2003 WL 1627043, at *12 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 25, 2003).
Jessup v. Am. Kennel Club Inc., 61 F. Supp. 2d 5, 12 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).
Kimble v. Marvel Entm’t, LLC, 135 S. Ct. 2401 (2015).
Kobe, Inc. v. Dempsey Pump Co., 198 F.2d 416 (10th Cir. 1952).
In re Kodak, Case No. 12-10202 (ALG) (Bankr Ct Del 2012).
Kyocera v. Int’l Trade Com’n, 545 F.3d 1340, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc., 694 F.3d 51 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Lotes Co. v. Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., No. 12-cv-7465-SAS (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 2013).
Lucent Techs., Inc. v. Gateway, Inc., 580 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Maric v. St. Agnes Hosp. Corp., 65 F.3d 310, 313 (2d Cir. 1995).
Martin v. Am. Kennel Club Inc., 697 F. Supp. 997, 999 n.4 (N.D. Ill. 1988).
Mason City Tent & Awning Co. v. Clapper, 144 F. Supp. 754 (W.D. Mo. 1956).
MercExchange, L.L.C. v. eBay, Inc., 401 F. 3d 1323, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
Merial Ltd. v. Cipla Ltd., 681 F.3d 1283 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 696 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2012).
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015).
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 854 F. Supp. 2d 993, 999 (W.D. Wash. 2012).
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 871 F. Supp. 2d 1089 (W.D. Wash. 2012).
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 963 F. Supp. 2d 1176 (W.D. Wash. 2013).
Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 2:10-cv-01823, 2013 WL 2111217 (W.D. Wash. 2013).
Microsoft Mobile, Inc. v. Interdigital, Inc., 1:15-cv-00723-RGA (D. Del. Apr. 13, 2016).
Microsoft Mobile, Inc. v. Interdigital, Inc., 1:15- cv- 00723- RGA (D. Del. May 16, 2017).
Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Serv. Corp., 465 U.S. 752, 768 (1984).
Morton Salt Co. v. Suppiger Co., 314 U.S. 488 (1942).
Motion Picture Pat. Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502, 510 (1917).
Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 1:10-cv-6385 (E.D. Ill. Oct. 6, 2010).
Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 1:10-cv-24063 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 10, 2010).
Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 10-cv-699 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 10, 2010).
In re Motorola Mobility, LLC & Google, Inc., No. 1210120 (F.T.C. 2013).
Multimedia Patent Trust v. Apple Inc., No. 10-CV-2618-H (KSC) (S.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2012).
N. Pac. Ry. Co. v. United States, 356 U.S. 1, 5 (1958).
Nat’l Harrow Co. v. E. Bement & Sons, 47 N.Y.S. 462, 468 (App. Div. 1897).
NCAA v. Bd. of Regents, 468 U.S. 85, 109 n.38 (1984).
In re Negotiated Data Sol. LLC (N-Data), No. 051-0094 (F.T.C. Jan. 2008).
Nero AG v. MPEG LA, L.L.C., No. 10-Cv-3672-MRP-RZ (C.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2010).
Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd. v. Int’l Trade Com’n, 667 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 8, 2012).
Nokia Corp. and Nokia Inc. v. Interdigital Communications Corp. and Interdigital Technology Corp., Civil Action No. 05-16-JJF (D. Del. Feb. 9, 2007).
In re Nortel Networks Inc, Case No. 09-10138 (KG) (Bankr Ct Del 2011).
In re Novon Int’l, Inc., No. 96-BK-15463B, 2000 WL 432848, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2000).
NYNEX Corp. v. Discon, Inc., 525 U.S. 128, 133 (1998).
One-Blue LLC v. Imation Corp., No. 1:13-cv-00917-UNA U.S. Dist. (D. Del May 22, 2013).
Openwave Sys., Inc. v. 724 Solutions (US) Inc, No. 3:09-CV-03511-CRB. (N.D.Cal. Nov. 12, 2009).
Openwave Sys., Inc. v. 724 Solutions (US) Inc., No. C 09-3511 RS (N.D. Cal. 2010).
Orken Exterminating Co. v. FTC, 894 F.2d 1354, 1364 (11th Cir. 1988).
Orr v. Bank of Am., 285 F.3d 764, 782 (9th Cir. 2002).
Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Torrent Pharm. Ltd., 99 F. Supp. 3d. 461 (D.N.J. 2015).
Paddock Publ’ns, Inc. v. Chi. Tribune Co., 103 F.3d 42, 47 (7th Cir. 1996).
Palmer v. BRG of Ga., Inc., 498 U.S. 46, 49 (1990) (per curiam).
Petersen v. Fee Int’l, Ltd.,381 F. Supp. 1071 (W.D. Okla. 1974).
Presidio Components, Inc. v. Am. Tech. Ceramics Corp., 702 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2012).
Princess Lida of Thurn & Taxis v. Thompson, 305 U.S. 456 (1939).
Princo Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 563 F.2d 1301, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
Princo Corp. v.Int’l Trade Comm’n, 616 F.3d 1318, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
Prism Techs. LLC v. Sprint Spectrum L.P., 849 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
In re Proxim, Case No. 05-11639 (pJW) (Bankr. Ct Del 2005).
In re Qimonda, 737 F.3d 14 (4th Cir. 2013).
Quaak v. Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler Bedrijfsrevisoren, 361 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2004).
Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., 539 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (S.D. Cal. 2007).
Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., 548 F.3d 1004 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Qualcomm v. Broadcom, 501 F.3d 297 (3rd Cir. 2007).
Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 553 U.S. 617 (2008).
Radiant Burners, Inc. v. Peoples Gas Light & Coke Co., 364 U.S. 656, 656 (1961)
Radio Sys. Corp. v. Lalor, 709 F.3d 1124 (Fed. Cir. 2013).
Rambus Inc. v. FTC, 522 F.3d 456, 459 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
Rambus Inc. v. Infineon Techs. Ag, 318 F.3d 1081 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
In re Rambus, Inc., Dkt. No. 9302 (F.T.C. 2006).
Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. LSI Corp., 946 F. Supp. 2d 998 (N.D. Cal. 2013).
Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. LSI Corp., C–12–03451 RMW, 2014 WL 46997 (N.D.Cal. Jan. 6, 2014).
Realtek Semiconductor, Corp. v. LSI Corp., No. C–12–3451–RMW, 2014 WL 2738216 (N.D. Cal. June 16, 2014).
Rembrandt Tech. LP. V. Harris Corp., 2008 Del. Super. LEXIS 400 (Del. Super. 2008).
Rembrandt Techs., L.P. v. Harris Corp., No. 07C-09-059-JRS, 2009 Del. Super. LEXIS 298, at *1 (Super. Ct. Aug. 14, 2009).
Research in Motion Limited v. Motorola, Inc., 644 F. Supp. 2d 788, 795–96 (N.D. Tex. 2008).
Research in Motion v. Motorola, Inc., 644 F.Supp.2d 788 (N.D. Tex. 2008).
Riles v. Shell Exploration & Production Co., 298 F.3d 1302 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
In re Robert Bosch GmbH, No. 121-0081 (F.T.C. 2013).
Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Mfg. Corp., 659 F.3d 1142 (Fed. Cir. 2011).
Rudenberg v. Clark, 72 F. Supp. 381 (D. Mass. 1947).
Rudenberg v. Clark, 81 F. Supp. 42 (D. Mass. 1948).
Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd. v. Apple Korea Ltd., Case no. 2011 GaHap 39552 (Aug. 24, 2012)
SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195 (2d Cir. 1981).
Scott Paper Co. v. Marcalus Co., 326 U.S. 249, 256 (1945).
SD3, LLC v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., 801 F.3d 412 (4th Cir. 2015).
Seattle Totems Hockey Club, Inc. v. Nat’l Hockey League, 652 F.2d 852 (9th Cir. 1981).
Seidenberg v. Summit Bank, 791 A.2d 1068 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2002).
Sessions Tank Liners, Inc. v. Joor Mfg., Inc., 17 F.3d 295, 299 (9th Cir. 1994).
Sony Elecs., Inc. v. Soundview Techs., Inc. (D. Conn 2001, p.185).
Spansion, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 629 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
Spectrum Sports, Inc. v. McQuillan, 506 U.S. 447 (1993).
Spindelfabrik Suessen-Schurr Stahlecker & Grill v. Schubert & Salzer Maschinenfabrik AG, 829 F.2d 1075 (Fed. Cir. 1987).
Stambler v. Diebold, Inc., No. 85 CV 3014 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 1988).
Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) v. United States, 33 F. 2d 617 (D.C. Ill. 1929).
Standard Oil Company v. United States, 283 U.S. 163 (1931).
Standard Sanitary Manufacturing v. United States, 226 U.S. 20 (1912).
In re Summit Technology, Inc., Dkt. No. 9286 (Fed. Trade Comm’n).
TCL Commc’n Tech. Holdings, Ltd. v. Telefonaktienbolaget LM Ericsson et al. (C.D. Cal. 2015).
Tewari De-Ox Systems, Inc. v. Mountain States/Rosen, L.L.C., 637 F.3d 604 (5th Cir. 2011).
Thompson v. Metropolitan Multi-List, Inc., 934 F.2d 1566 (11th Cir. 2011).
Toys “R” Us, Inc. v. FTC, 221 F.3d 928, 937 (7th Cir. 2000).
TruePosition, Inc. v. LM Ericsson Tel. Co., 977 F. Supp. 2d 462, 470 (E.D. Pa. 2013).
TruePosition, Inc. v. LM Ericsson Telephone Co., 899 F. Supp. 3d 356 (E.D. Pa. 2012).
Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat. Ct.) (Eng.)
U.S. Gypsum Co. v. Nat’l Gypsum Co., 352 U.S. 457, 465 (1957).
U.S. Philips Corp. v. ITC, 424 F.3d 1179, 1188 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
In re Union Oil Co. of Cal., 140 F.T.C. 123 (2003).
In re Matter of Union Oil Co. of Cal., 138 F.T.C. 1 (2004).
United Mine Workers of Am. v. Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 (1965).
United States v. Aluminum Co. of America (Alcoa), 1940–1943 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,200, 1942 WL 82576 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 15, 1942).
United States v. American Bosch Corp., 1940–1943 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,253, 1942 WL 82620 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 1942).
United States v. ASCAP, 1940–43 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,104 (S.D.N.Y. 1941).
United States v. Associated Patents, 134 F. Supp. 74 (E.D. Mich. 1955), aff’d, 350 U.S. 960 (1956).
United States v. AT&T Co., 552 F. Supp. 131, 135–38 (D.D.C. 1982).
United States v. Automobile Mfrs. Ass’n, 307 F. Supp. 617 (C.D. Cal. 1969).
United States v. Besser Mfg. Co., 96 F. Supp. 304 (E.D. Mich. 1951).
United States v. BMI, 1966 Trade Cas.(CCH) ¶ 71,941 (S.D.N.Y. 1966).
United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 115 F. Supp. 835, 842 (D.N.J. 1953).
United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 15 F.2d 715 (N.D. Ohio 1925).
United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 82 F. Supp. 753 (D.N.J. 1949).
United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563 (1966).
United States v. Hartford-Empire Co., 46 F. Supp. 541 (N.D. Ohio 1942).
United States v. Holophane Co., 119 F. Supp. 114 (S.D. Ohio 1954).
United States v. Krasnov, 143 F. Supp. 184, 189 (E.D. Pa. 1956).
United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. 98–1232 (D.D.C. Nov. 12, 2002).
United States v. Microsoft, Corp., 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001).
United States v. Nat’l Lead Co., 332 U.S. 319 (1947).
United States v. Nat’l Lead Co., 63 F. Supp. 513 (S.D.N.Y. 1945).
United States v. New Wrinkle, Inc., 342 U.S. 371 (1952).
United States v. Singer Mfg. Co., 374 U.S. 174 (1963).
United States v. Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey), 1940–1943 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,198, 1942 WL 82574 (D.N.J. Mar. 25, 1942).
United States v. Studiengesellschaft Kohle, m.b.H., 670 F.2d 1122, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1981).
United States v. Terminal R.R. Ass’n of St. Louis, 224 U.S. 383 (1912).
United States v. Textile Mach. Works, Civil No. 43–671., 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1909, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 9, 1950).
United States v. Topco Assocs., Inc., 405 U.S. 596, 608 (1972).
United States v. Trenton Potteries Co., 273 U.S. 392, 400–01 (1927).
United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (1948).
United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 67 F. Supp. 397, 407 (D.D.C 1946).
United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1917, 1951 Trade Cas. (CCH) P62,853 (D.D.C. May 15, 1951).
United States v. Visa U.S.A., Inc., 344 F.3d 229, 239 (2d Cir. 2003).
United States v. Western Elec. Co., 1956 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 68,246, at 71,138 (D.N.J.1956).
United States v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 648 F.2d 642, 647 (9th Cir. 1981).
In re Use of Carterfone Device (F.C.C. 1968).
Verizon Commc’ns Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398 (2004).
Virnetx, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 767 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2014).
Voda v. Cordis Corp., 536 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Vringo, Inc. v. ZTE Corp., No. 14-CV-4988 LAK, 2015 WL 3498634 (S.D.N.Y. June 3, 2015).
W.W. Montague & Co. v. Lowry, 193 U.S. 38, 47–48 (1904).
Wang Labs., Inc. v. Mitsubishi Elecs. Am., Inc., 103 F.3d 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U.S. 305 (1982).
Willemijn Houdstermaatschappij BV v. Standard Microsystems Corp., 925 F. Supp. 193 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).
Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
Windsurfing Int’l, Inc. v. AMF, Inc., 782 F.2d 995 (Fed. Cir. 1986).
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 136 (1969).
Zoran Corp. v. DTS, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6675 (N.D. Cal. 2009).

China

最高人民法院关于朝阳兴诺公司按照建设部颁发的行业标准《复合载体夯扩桩设计规程》设计、施工而实施标准中专利的行为是否构成侵犯专利权问题的函 ([2008]民三他字第4号) [Supreme People’s Court’s Letter of Reply on Whether Chaoyang Xingnuo Co. Infringed on a Patent Included in a Ministry of Construction Standard When it Implemented the Patent as Required by the Standard] (July 8, 2008).
衡水子牙河建筑工程有限公司与张晶廷等侵犯发明专利权纠纷上诉案 [Civil Judgment on Appeal of Dispute Between Hengshui Ziyahe Construction Ltd. Co. and Zhang Jingting et al. Regarding Invention Patent Infringement], Hebei High People’s Court (March 21, 2011).
Huawei Technology Co., Ltd. v InterDigital Communications, Inc., Shenzhen Intermediate Ct. IP Civ. First Instance No. 857, aff’d (2013) Guangdong High Ct. Civ. Third instance No. 305.

European Union

Microsoft/ Nokia, Case No COMP/M.7047, Commission decision of 4 December 2013.
Office for Publications of the European Union, Case No. Comp/M.6381, Google/Motorola Mobility, European Commission decision ¶¶ 107 et seq. (February 13, 2012).
European Comm’n, Sun/ETSI (Case 37926).
United Brands, CJEU, 14 February 1978, Case 27/76, [1978] ECR 207.
Hilti v Commission, General Court, 2 March 1994 T-30/89, [1991] ECR II-1439.
Peterbroeck, CJEU, 14 December 1995, C-312/93, [1995] ECR I-4599.
Tetra Pak v. Commission, General Court, 14 November 1996, Case C-333/94 P, [1996] ECR I-5951.
Microsoft, General Court, 17 September 2007, Case T-201/04, [2004] ECR II-3601.
European Comm’n Decision COMP/38.636- Rambus of 9 Dec. 2009, art. 101, 102, 2010 O.J. (C 30).
Deutsche Telekom, CJEU, 14 October 2010, Case C-280/08, [2010] ECR I-9555.
Scarlet, CJEU, 24 November 2011, Case C-70/10, [2011] ECR I-11959.
European Comm’n Decision of 13 February 2012, COMP/M.6381 – Google/Motorola Mobility, C(2012) 1068.
Microsoft Corp. v Commission, General Court, 27 June 2012, T-167/08, ECLI:EU:T:2012:323.
European Comm’n Decision of 29 April 2014, AT.39939, Samsung – Enforcement of UMTS Standard Essential Patents, C(2014) 2891 final.
European Comm’n Decision of 29 April 2014, AT.39985, Motorola – Enforcement of GPRS Standard Essential Patents, C(2014) 2892 final.
Huawei v ZTE, CJEU, C-170/13, 16 July 2015, ECLI:EU:C:2015:477.

France

Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 19 August 2010, 2010/56889, Aventis v. Teva (Taxotere).
Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 12 February 2010, 2010/51453, DuPont v. Mylan (Losartan) and 28 January 2011, 2011/50892, Novartis v. Actavis (Diovan).
Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 29 November 2013, 2012/14922, Ericsson v. TCT Mobile Europe.
Cour d’appel Lyon, 20 October 2009, 2008/06216, Mundipharma v. Mylan and Tribunal de grande instance Strasbourg, 10 March 2009, PIBD 2009, 899, Laboratoires Negma v. Biogaran.
Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 28 January 2011, 2011/50892, Novartis v. Actavis (Diovan).
Cour d’appel Paris, 21 March 2012, PIBD 2012, 963, Novartis v Mylan.
Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 15 September 2009, PIBD 2010, 913, Radiante v. Medi.
Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 8 December 2011, PIBD 2012, 956, Samsung v. Apple.
Tribunale di Torino, 18 gennaio 2016, 30308/2015, Sisvel/ZTE;
Tribunal de commerce Marseille, 20 September 2016, 2016F01637, Wiko v Sisvel.

Germany

Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Düsseldorf 29 April 2010, BeckRS 2010, 15862 (Harnkatheterset). Oberlandesgericht
Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Karlsruhe, 27 February 2012, WuW 2012, 508, GRUR 2012, 736 (Motorola v. Apple).
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 9 December 2011, BeckRS 2011, 29013, MittdtPatA 2012, 120 (Motorola v Apple).
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 2 May 2012, BeckRS 2012, 11804 (Motorola v. Microsoft).
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 30 November 2006, NJOZ 2007, 2100, BeckRS 2007,06067, WuW 2007, 1278 (MPEG2)
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 29 January 2016, BeckRS 2016, 04228 (NTT DoCoMo v. HTC Germany)
Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice], 6 May 2009, BGHZ 180, 312, NJW-RR 2009, 1047, GRUR 2009, 694, WuW 2009,773 (Orange Book Standard).
[OLG] [Court of Appeal] Düsseldorf, 29 May 2008, GRUR-RR 2008, 329 (Olanzapine).
Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 17 maart 2010, IEPT 20100317, IEF 8682 (Philips/SK-Kassetten).
Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 25 april 2007, IEPT 20070425, IEF 3891 (Philips/LG).
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim 8 January 2016, 7 O 96/14, openJur 2016, 6027 (Pioneer)
Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Karlsruhe, 23 April 2015, GRUR-RR 2015, 326 (Saint Lawrence v. Deutsche Telekom)
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 27 November 2015, GRUR-RS 2015, 20077 (Saint Lawrence v. Deutsche Telekom)
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 31 March 2016, ECLI:DE:LGD:2016:0331.4A.O126.14.00, BeckRS 2016,08040 (Saint Lawrence v. Vodafone)
Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 14 oktober 2011, ECLI:NL:RBSGR:2011:BT7610 (Samsung/Apple).
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 3 November 2015, ECLI:DE:LGD:2015:1103.4A.O144.14.00, GRUR-RS 2015, 19564 (Sisvel v. Haier)
Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Düsseldorf, 13 January 2016, ECLI:DE:OLGD:2016:0113.I15U65.15.00, BeckRS 2016, 01679 (Sisvel v. Haier)
Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 14 maart 2012, ECLI:NL:RBSGR:2012:BV8871 (Samsung/Apple).
Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 10 maart 2011, IEPT 2011031, IEF 9463 (Sony/LG).
Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice], 13 July 2004, BGHZ 160,167, IIC 2005, 741 (Standard-Spundfass)
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 30 November 2006, BeckRS 2011, 06018 (Video Signal Encoding I)
Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 13 February 2007, BeckRS 2008,07732 (GPRS); Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 17 April 2007, BeckRS 2007, 15905 (White Light LED II).

India

Best It Worlds (India) Private Ltd. v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Case No. 4 of 2015, Competition Commission of India (May 12, 2015).
Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd. v. Coca Cola Co. (1995), 5 SCC 545 (India).
Intex Techs. (India) v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Case No. 76 of 2013, Competition Commission of India (January 16, 2014).
Micromax Informatics, Ltd v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Case No. 50 of 2013, Competition Commission of India (November 12, 2013).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Competition Comm’n of India, No. 1006 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (February 17, 2014).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Competition Comm’n of India, W.P. (C) No. 464 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (2016).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Gionee Communication Equipment Co. Ltd., Interim Application No. 17578 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 2010 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (October 31, 2013) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Intex Techs. (India) Ltd., Interim Application No. 6735 of 2014 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 1045 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (March 13, 2015) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. M/S Best IT World Private Ltd. (iBall), Interim Application 17351 of 2015 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 2501 of 2015, High Ct. of Delhi (September 2, 2015).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Mercury Elecs., Interim Application No. 3825 of 2013 and Interim Application No. 4694 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (November 12, 2014) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Mercury Elecs., Interim Application No. 3825 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (March 6, 2013) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Mercury Elecs., Interim Application No. 4694 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (March 19, 2013) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Xiaomi Tech., Interim Application No. 24580 of 2014 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 3775 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (December 8, 2014) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Xiaomi Tech., Interim Application No. 3074 of 2015 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 3775 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (2014) (India).
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericssson v. Micromax Informatics Ltd. & Others, CCP No. 71 of 2015 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (December 2, 2015) (India).
Vringo Infrastructure Inc. v. IndiaMART Intermesh Ltd., Interim Application No. 2112 of 2014 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 314 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (August 5, 2014).
Xiaomi Tech. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, First Appeal Order (Original Side) No. 522 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (2014) (India).
YU Televentures Private Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericssson & Others, LPA 888 of 2015 and C.Ms. No. 30187–88, 30582 of 2015 in Crl.M.A. 18179 of 2015, High Ct. of Delhi (December 11, 2015) (India).

Italy

Tribunale di Trieste, 29.7 2011, Ericsson/Onda. Giur. dir. ind., 2013, 245.
Tribunale di Roma, 8 luglio 2011, Ericsson/ZTE. Giur. dir. ind., 2013, 211.
Tribunale di Lodi, 9 giugno 2003, Misal Erexons/Mitam.
Tribunale di Genoa, 8.5.2004, 2521/0-2538/04, Philips/Italcard. Giur. dir. ind., 2006, 175.
Tribunale di Milano, 5.12012, 45629-1-2011 and 59734-2011, Samsung/Apple. Giur. dir. ind., 2014, 51.
Tribunale di Bologna, 3.1.2005, 4847/1, Soc. Sig Alfa/Soc. Sacmi Labelling. Giur. dir. ind., 2005, 625.

Japan

Apple Japan Godo Kaisha v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Tokyo District Court Decisions of Feb. 28, 2013, case number 2011 (yo) 22027 and 2011 (yo) 22098, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/23yo22027full.pdf and www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/23yo22098full.pdf
Apple Japan Godo Kaisha v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., IP High Court (Grand Panel) Decisions of May 16, 2014, case number 2013 (ra) 10007 Hanrei Jiho No. 2224, p.146 case 2, Hanrei Times No.1402 p.166 case 2 and 2013 (ra) 10008, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/25_ra_10007zenbun.pdf and www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/25_ra_10008zenbun.pdf
Imation K.K. v. One-Blue L.L.C., Tokyo District Court Judgment of February 18, 2015, case number 2013 (wa) 21383, Hanrei Jiho No. 2257, p. 87, Hanrei Times No. 1412, p. 265
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan Godo Kaisha, Tokyo District Court Judgment of Feb. 28, 2013, case number 2011 (wa) 38969, Hanrei Jiho No. 2186, p154, Hanrei Times No. 1390 p.81, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/23_wa_38969.pdf
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan Godo Kaisha, IP High Court (Grand Panel) Judgment of May 16, 2014, case number 2013 (ne) 10043, Hanrei Jiho No. 2224, p.146 case 1, Hanrei Times No. 1402, p.166 case 1, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/25ne10043full.pdf

Korea

Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. Apple Korea Ltd., [Seoul S. Cent. D.C.], 2011GaHap39552, August 24, 2012 (S. Kor.).
Qualcomm Inc. v. Korea Fair Trade Commission, [KFTC], 2009JiSik0329, December 30, 2009, aff’d in part, [Seoul High Ct.], 2010Nu3932, June 19, 2013 (S. Kor.).

Netherlands

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. v SK Kassetten GmbH & Co. KG, District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, March 17, 2010, Joint Cases No. 316533/HA ZA 08-2522 and 316535/HA ZA 08-2524.
Sony Supply Chain Solutions (Europe) BV v. LG Electronics Inc., District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands, March 10, 2011, No. 389067/KG ZA 11–269.

United Kingdom

American Cyanamid v. Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396 (HL).
Hope v. Carnegie (1866) 1 Ch.App. 320.
HTC Corporation v Nokia Corporation [2013] EWHC 3778 (Pat).
Huawei v. Samsung and Google [2015] EWHC 3366 (Pat) Case No: HP-2014-000005.
IPCom GmbH & Co. KG v. HTC Europe Co. Ltd. [2017] EWCA Civ. 90 (February 28, 2017).
Lord Portarlington v. Soulby (1834) 3 My & K. 104, 40 Eng. Rep. 40.
Navitaire Inc v. EasyJet Airline Co Ltd (No 2) [2004] EWHC 2271 (Ch).
Nokia Corporation v. InterDigital Technology Corporation [2004] EWHC 2920, appealed in April 2005 at [2005] EWCA Civ 614).
Nokia Corporation v. InterDigital Technology Corporation [2006] EWHC 802 (Pat).
Peck v. Jenness, 48 U.S. (7 How.) 612 (1849).
Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. v. Unwired Planet Inc., 2016 EWCA Civ 489 (UK Ct. Appeal, May 27, 2016).
Series 5 Software Ltd v Clarke [1996] 1 All ER 853 (Ch.).
Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Co [1895] 1 Ch 287 (CA).
Unwired Planet Intl. Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. [2015] EWHC 3366 (Pat.) (November 23, 2015).
Unwired Planet Intl. Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat) (April 5, 2017)
Unwired Planet v. Samsung [2016] EWCA (Civ) 489.
Vringo Infrastructure v ZTE [2015] EWHC 214 (Pat).

Legislative and Agency Materials

United States

19 C.F.R. § 210.10(2013).

19 C.F.R. § 210.8 (2013).

28 C.F.R. § 50.6(8) (2014).

118 Stat. 661, 108th Cong., H.R. 1086, 2004.

9 U.S.C. §§ 1–14 (2006).

11 U.S.C. § 363 (2006).

11 U.S.C. § 365 (2006).

15 U.S.C. § 1 (2012).

15 U.S.C. § 13 (2012).

15 U.S.C. § 2 (2012).

15 U.S.C. § 29 (2012).

15 U.S.C. § 4301 (2014).

15 U.S.C. § 4302 (2014).

15 U.S.C. § 4303 (2014).

15 U.S.C. § 4304 (2014).

15 U.S.C. § 4305 (2014).

15 U.S.C. § 45 (2006).

19 U.S.C. § 1337 (2012).

35 U.S.C. § 121 (2006).

35 U.S.C. § 154 (2016).

35 U.S.C. § 261 (2012).

35 U.S.C. § 271 (2012)

35 U.S.C. § 283 (2012).

35 U.S.C. § 284 (2012).

35 U.S.C. § 294 (2012).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 1997–MPEG-2 Letter. Letter from Joel I. Klein, Acting Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Garrard R. Beeney, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP (June 26, 1997).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 1998–DVD3C Letter. Letter from Joel I. Klein, Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Garrard R. Beeney, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP (December 16, 1998) www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/busreview/2121.pdf.

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 1999–DVD6C Letter. Letter from Joel I. Klein, Assistant Att’y Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Carey R. Ramos, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP (June 10, 1999).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2002–3GPP Letter. Letter from Charles A. James, Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Ky P. Ewing, Vinson & Elkins LLP (November 12, 2002).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2006–VITA Letter. Letter from Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Att’y Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Robert A. Skitol, Esq., Drinker, Biddle & Reath, LLP (October 30, 2006).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2007a –IEEE-SA Letter. Letter from Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Att’y Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Michael A. Lindsay, Esq., Dorsey & Whitney LLP (April 30, 2007).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2007b. Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition.

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2008–RFID Letter. Letter from Thomas O. Barnett, Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to William F. Dolan & Geoffrey Oliver, Jones Day (October 21, 2008).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2011a. CPTN Holdings LLC and Novell Inc. Change Deal in Order to Address Department of Justice’s Open Source Concerns (April 20, 2011).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2011b. Introduction to Antitrust Division Business Reviews.

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2012. Statement of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division on Its Decision to Close Its Investigations of Google Inc.’s Acquisition of Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. and the Acquisitions of Certain Patents by Apple Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Research in Motion Ltd., (February 13, 2012).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2013–IPXI Letter. Letter from William J. Baer, Assistant Att’y Gen., Antitrust Div., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Garrard R. Beeney, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP (March 26, 2013).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2014. Statement of the Department of Justice Antitrust Division on Its Decision to Close Its Investigation of Samsung’s Use of Its Standards-Essential Patents (February 7, 2014).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice (DOJ). 2015–IEEE-SA Letter. Letter from Renata B. Hesse, Acting Assistant Att’y Gen., U.S. Dep’t of Justice, to Michael A. Lindsay, Esq., Dorsey & Whitney LLP (February 2, 2015).

U.S. Dep’t of Justice and Patent & Trademark Office (DOJ-PTO). 2013. Policy Statement on Remedies for Standards-Essential Patents Subject to Voluntary F/RAND Commitments. www.justice.gov/atr/public/guidelines/290994.pdf.

Dep’t of Justice & Fed. Trade Comm’n (DOJ-FTC). 1995. Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property.

Dep’t of Justice & Fed. Trade Comm’n (DOJ-FTC). 2007. Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition.

Dep’t of Justice & Fed. Trade Comm’n (DOJ-FTC). 2010. Horizontal Merger Guidelines.

Fed. Reg. 39,121 (July 5, 2011).70 Fed. Reg. 43, 251 (July 21, 2005).

Fed. Reg. 4299–4300 (January 26, 2016).

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n & Dep’t of Justice (FTC-DOJ). 2000. Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors.

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 1983. Policy Statement on Deception,

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 2003. To Promote Innovation: The Proper Balance of Competition and Patent Law and Policy.

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 2011. FTC Patent Standards Workshop.

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 2012. Third Party U.S. Fed. Trade Comm’n’s Statement on the Public Interest, Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music And Data Processing Devices, Computers and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-745 (I.T.C. June 6, 2012),

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 2015. Statement of Enforcement Principles Regarding “Unfair Methods of Competition” Under Section 5 of the FTC Act.

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 2016. Report: Patent Assertion Entity Activity.

U.S. Federal Trade Comm’n (FTC). 2017. The Antitrust Laws.

Int’l Trade Comm’n (ITC) 2017. Mission Statement.

Rules of Adjudication and Enforcement, 76 Fed. Reg. 64,803 (Nov. 18, 2011).

Sen. Doc. No. 173, 75th Cong., 3d Sess. (1938); 83 Cong. Rec. 5992, 5995 (1938).

Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) § 2–305(1) (2008).

U.S. Trade Rep. 2013. Letter from Michael B. G. Froman, United States Trade Rep., to Irving A. Williamson, Chairman, USITC (August 3, 2013).

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). 2017a. USPTO Disclosures made under §294 after 2008 can be accessed through the USPTO’s online FOIA Reading Room under “Notices of Suit Filed with U.S. District Courts.”

U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). 2017b. USPTO Earlier disclosures are available in individual patent file histories stored at the USPTO and available online through the USPTO’s Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) website. http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair.

China

Ministry of Commerce People’s Republic of China. 2012. Public Announcement No. 25 Concerning Anti-Monopoly Review Decisions on Conditional Approval of Google’s Acquisition of Motorola Mobility.

Standardization Law (promulgated by the Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong., December 29, 1988, effective Apr. 1, 1989) P.R.C. Laws.

中华人民共和国反垄断法 [The Antimonopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong., August 30, 2007, effective August 1, 2008), 2007 Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong. Gaz. 517 (China).

中华人民共和国国家发展和改革委员会行政处罚决定书 [Administrative Decision of National Development and Reform Commission], February 9, 2015.

中华人民共和国标准化法 [The Standardization Law of the People’s Republic of China] (promulgated by the Standing Comm. Nat’l People’s Cong., December 29, 1988, effective April 1, 2009).

关于滥用知识产权的反垄断执法指南 (国家工商总局第七稿) [Antimonopoly Enforcement Guidelines on Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights (SAIC Seventh Draft)], February 4, 2016.

关于滥用知识产权的反垄断指南》 (征求意见稿) [Guidelines on Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights under the AML (Draft for Comments)], NDRC, December 31, 2015.

国家工商行政管理总局关于禁止滥用知识产权排除、限制竞争行为的规定 [SAIC Rules on the Prohibition of Abuses of Intellectual Property Rights for Purposes of Eliminating or Restricting Competition], SAIC Order No. 74, April 7, 2015

国家标准涉及专利的管理规定 (暂行) (征求意见稿) [Regulation on the Administration of National Standards Involving Patents (Interim) (Draft for Public Comments)] (December 19, 2012).

国家标准涉及专利的管理规定 (暂行) [Regulation on the Administration of National Standards Involving Patents (Interim) (Draft for Public Comments)] (December 19, 2012).

国家标准涉及专利的规定 (暂行) (征求意见稿) [Regulation on Issues Related to Patents in National Standards (Interim) (Draft for Public Comments, March 19, 2004)].

涉及专利的国家标准制修订管理规定 (暂行) (征求意见稿) [Regulation on the Administration of Formulating and Revising National Standards Involving Patents (Interim) (Draft for Public Comments)] (November 2, 2009).

European Union

Council Regulation 1215/2012, on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Recast 2002) O.J. (L 12) (EC), art. 1(2)(d).

Council Regulation 1215/2012, on Jurisdiction and the Recognition and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters (Recast 2002) O.J. (L 12) (EC), art. 27.

Court of Justice European Union. 2012. Recommendation to national courts and tribunals in relation to the initiation of preliminary ruling proceedings, (2012/C 338/01).

Directive 2004/48 of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights [2004] OJ L 157/45, as corrected at [2004] OJ L 195/16.

EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, Article 47 – Right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial.

European Comm’n. 1987. Green Paper on the Development of the Common Market for Telecommunications Services and Equipment. COM (87) 290 final.

European Comm’n. 1992. COM (92) 445 final, Communication on Intellectual Property Rights and Standardization.

European Comm’n. 2000. Guide to the implementation of directives based on the new approach and the global approach.

European Comm’n. 2003. COM(2003)46, Commission proposal which led to Directive 2004/48 (January 30, 2003).

European Comm’n. 2007a. Press Release – Commission confirms sending a Statement of Objections to Rambus, MEMO/07/330, August 23, 2007.

European Comm’n. 2007b. Press Release – Commission initiates formal proceedings against Qualcomm, MEMO/07/389, October 1, 2007.

European Comm’n. 2009 Commission closes formal proceedings against Qualcomm, MEMO/09/516, November 24, 2009.

European Comm’n. 2009a. Commission welcomes IPCom’s public FRAND declaration, December 12, 2009; MEMO/09/549.

European Comm’n. 2009b. Press Release – Commission accepts commitments from Rambus lowering memory chip royalty rates, IP/09/1897, December 9, 2009.

European Comm’n. 2011. OJ C 11, Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to horizontal co-operation agreements.

European Comm’n. 2011. Proposal for a Regulation Of The European Parliament And Of The Council On Entrusting The Office For Harmonisation In The Internal Market (Trade Marks And Designs) With Certain Tasks Related To The Protection Of Intellectual Property Rights, Including The Assembling Of Public And Private Sector Representatives As A European Observatory On Counterfeiting And Piracy. COM(2011) 288 final.

European Comm’n. 2012a. Press Release – European Comm’n, Samsung – Enforcement of ETSI Standards Essential Patents (SEPs) (December 21, 2012).

European Comm’n. 2012b Press Release –Commission opens proceedings against Samsung, IP/12/89, January 31, 2012.

European Comm’n. 2014–Motorola. Press Release –Commission Finds That Motorola Mobility Infringed EU Competition Rules by Misusing Standard Essential Patents (April 29, 2014),

European Comm’n. 2014–Samsung. Press Release–Commission Accepts Legally Binding Commitments by Samsung Electronics on Standard Essential Patent Injunctions (April 29, 2014).

European Comm’n. 2014. Guidelines on the application of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to technology transfer agreements, OJ C89, March 28, 2014.

European Comm’n. 2016. COM(2016) 176 final, ICT Standardisation Priorities for the Digital Single Market (April 19, 2016).

Treaty of Rome (1957).

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) (Consolidated version 2016) – OJ C 202, 2016.

France

Code de la propriété intellectuelle.

Loi n° 2007-1544 du 29 octobre 2007 de lutte contre la contrefaçon, JORF 2007.17775.

Germany

Gesetz zur Verbesserung der Durchsetzung von Rechten des Geistigen Eigentums, BGBl. 2008.I.1191. Patent Act (Patentgesetz, BGBl. 1981.I.1).

India

Code of Civil Procedure, Order 39, Code Civ. Proc. (India).

Competition Act, 2002, No. 12, Acts of Parliament, 2003 (India).

Patents Act, No. 39 of 1970, India Code (1970).

Japan

Art. 2 (1) (xiv), Unfair Competition Prevention Act of Japan (UCPA, Act No. 47 of May 19, 1993 amended by the Act No. 12 of March 31, 2012) (Art. 2 (1) (xv), UCPA amended by the Act No 54 of July 10, 2015).

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 1982. Designation of Unfair Trade Practices (FTC Public Notice No. 15 of June 18, 1982, revised by JFTC Public Notice No. 18 of October 28, 2009) pursuant to Article 2 (9) (vi) of AMA.

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 2005. Antimonopoly Act Guidelines on Standardization and Patent Pool Arrangements.

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 2007. Antimonopoly Act Guidelines on Standardization and Patent Pool Arrangements (Amended)

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 2015. Request for Public Comments on Partial Amendment of “Guidelines for the Use of Intellectual Property under the Antimonopoly Act” (Draft). (FRAND Guidelines).

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 2016a. Note 1 of Declaration Paper of Licensing Industrial Property Rights attached to the Operation Rules of Handling the Industrial Property Rights.

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 2016b. Summary of Opinions and Official Comments Thereto on the Draft Partial Amendment to “Guidelines for the Use of Intellectual Property under the Antimonopoly Act.”

Japan Fair Trade Comm’n. 2016c. Press Release: Closing the investigation on the suspected violation by One-Blue, LLC of the Antimonopoly Act (November 18, 2016), available at www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/yearly-2016/November/161118.html.

Korea

Korea Fair Trade Comm’n. 2009. Press Release–Qualcomm’s Abuse of Market Dominance (July 23, 2009).

Korea Fair Trade Comm’n. 2014. Press Release–Determination That Samsung Does Not Violate the Monopoly Regulation & Fair Trade Act by Seeking Injunctive Relief Against Apple for SEP Infringement in Korea (February 25, 2014).

Korea Fair Trade Comm’n. 2014. Review Guidelines on Unfair Exercise of Intellectual Property Rights (December 2014).

Korea Fair Trade Comm’n. 2016. Press Release–KFTC Imposes Sanctions Against Qualcomm’s Abuse of SEPs of Mobile Communications – Imposes 1.03 Trillion Won, the Highest Penalty Surcharge Ever Handed to an Individual Company by the KFTC and Remedies on Unfair Business Models (December 28, 2016).

Korea Fair Trade Comm’n. 2016. Review Guidelines on Unfair Exercise of Intellectual Property Rights (March 2016).

United Kingdom

Agreement on co-operation in the field of digital cellular radiocommunications, signed in Nice, France, June 20, 1985, extended to the UK on July 2, 1986.

Patents Act 1977, c. 37, s. 61 (1).

Section 37(1) of the Supreme Court Act 1981 (UK).

The Intellectual Property (Enforcement, etc.) Regulations 2006 of 29 April 2006, Statutory Instrument 2006 No.1028.

United Nations

U.N. Comm. on Intl. Trade Law. 1958. Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958). available at www.uncitral.org/uncitral/en/uncitral_texts/arbitration/NYConvention.html (ratified by 149 countries as of 2013).

SSO and Patent Pool Materials

3GPP Partnership Project (3GPP). 2012. Working Procedures.

3GPP Partnership Project (3GPP). 2016. 3GPP working procedures.

3GPP Partnership Project (3GPP). 2016. Specifications.

Accellera. 2017. Accellera Policy and Q’s and A’s. www.accellera.org/about/policies/Accellera_Patent_Policy_QA.pdf.

AFNOR. 2009. The Economic Impact of Standardization – technological change, standards growth in France. AFNOR Group.

AFNOR. 2016. ÉTUDE DE L’IMPACT ÉCONOMIQUE DE LA NORMALISATION. AFNOR Group.

Am. Standards Ass’n. (ASA). 1932. Minutes of Meeting of Standards Council (November 30, 1932).

Am. Standards Ass’n. (ASA). 1956. ASA Policies on Standardization – Draft for Consideration by Board of Directors (March 26, 1956).

Am. Standards Ass’n. (ASA). 1959. Procedures of American Standards Association (1959).

American Nat’l Standards Inst. (ANSI). 2009. ANSI - A Historical Overview.

American Nat’l Standards Inst. (ANSI). 2012. Guidelines for Implementation of the ANSI Patent Policy.

American Nat’l Standards Inst. (ANSI). 2015. Guidelines for Implementation of the ANSI Patent Policy.

American Nat’l Standards Inst. (ANSI). 2016. ANSI Essential Requirements: Due Process Requirements for American National Standards.

ASCAP. 2016. Revenue Tops $1 Billion for Second Year in a Row. www.ascap.com/press/2016/0427-ascap-revenue-tops-one-billion-for-second-year.aspx.

ASCAP. 2017. About Us. www.ascap.com/about.

Audio Visual Coding Standard Group of China (AVS). 2008. IPR Policy (March 29, 2008). www.avs.org.cn/en/.

Blu-Ray Disc Association. 2010. Amended & Restated Bylaws of Blu-Ray Disc Association.

Blu-Ray Disc Association. 2016. History and Association.

CEN-CENELEC 2016. Standard Essential Patents and Fair, Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory (FRAND) Commitments (September 2016).

DCR Agreement. 1985. Agreement on co-operation in the field of digital cellular radiocommunications, signed in Nice, France, June 20, 1985, extended on July 2, 1986.

DVB Project. 2003. Rules and Procedures of the DVB MHP Experts Group (MEG), in MHP Implementation Arrangements and Associated Agreements, DVB BlueBook (July 2003).

DVB Project. 2014, Memorandum of Understanding (January 3, 2014).

DVB. 2017. About DVB. www.dvb.org/about.

DVD6C. 2016. Licensors. www.dvd6cla.com/licensors.html.

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 1993. Intellectual Property Rights Policy and Undertaking, ETSI/GA15 (93)TD 25 (January 5, 1993).

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 1994. Interim Intellectual Property Rights Policy (November 23, 1994).

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 2011. Intellectual Property Rights Policy (November 2011).

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 2013. ETSI Guide on Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) (September 19, 2013).

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 2015. Interim Intellectual Property Rights Policy (November 18, 2015).

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 2016. ETSI Directives.

European Telecom. Stds. Inst. (ETSI). 2016. Intellectual Property Rights Policy.

GSM MOU. 1987. Memorandum of Understanding on the Implementation of a Pan European 900 MHz Digital Cellular Mobile Telecommunications Service in 1991 with Full International Roaming (September 7, 1987).

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 1992. IEEE Standards Board Operations Manual (1992).

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 1994. IEEE Standards Board Operations Manual (1994).

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 1995. IEEE Standards Board Bylaws (1995).

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 2005. IEEE Standards Board Operations Manual (2005).

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 2006. IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws.

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 2015a. IEEE Standards Board Bylaws (December 2016)

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 2015b. IEEE-SA Letter of Assurance Form.

Inst. Electrical & Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE) 2016. IEEE-SA, Understanding Patent Issues During IEEE-SA Standards Development (September 7, 2016).

Int’l Organization for Standardization (ISO). 2017. Directives and Policies.

Int’l Organization for Standardization (ISO). 2014. Economic Benefits of Standards.

Int’l Telecommunication Union (ITU). 2015. Guidelines for Implementation of the Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC.

Int’l Telecommunication Union (ITU). 2016. Patent Statement and Licensing Declaration Form (June 26, 2015).

Int’l Telecommunication Union (ITU). 2017. Common Patent Policy for ITU-T/ITU-R/ISO/IEC.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2005. RFC 3979: Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology.

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). 2008. IPR Details. https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/941/.

Joint Electron Device Engineering Council (JEDEC). 2017. About JEDEC. www.jedec.org/about-jedec.

MPEGLA. 2017. Revolutionizing Intellectual property Rights Management. www.mpegla.com.

Multimedia over Coax Alliance. 2011. Multimedia over Coax Alliance Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy.

National Electrical Medical Assn (NEMA). 2017. Patent Disclosure Policy: Intellectual Property and Standards.

National Inst. of Standards and Technology (NIST). 2014. NIST Launches a New U.S. Time Standard: NIST-F2 Atomic Clock.

OpenStand. 2012. Principles. https://open-stand.org/about-us/principles/.

SISVEL. 2017. History. www.sisvel.com/about-us/history.

Telecommunications Industry Ass’n. (TIA). 2005. Guidelines to the Intellectual Property Rights Policy of the Telecommunications Industry Association (March 2005).

United States of America Standards Institute (USASI). 1970. Operating Procedures.

United States of America Standards Institute (USASI). 1969. Operating Procedures.

VIA Corp. 2016. www.via-corp.com/licensing/lte/licensors.html.

VIA Corp. 2017. About. www.via-corp.com/us/en/about.html.

VMEbus International Trade Association (VITA). 2006. VITA Patent Policy (December 2006).

VMEbus International Trade Association (VITA). 2008. Press Release. January 22, 2008. “ANSI Decision in Motorola vs. VITA.”

VMEbus International Trade Association (VITA). 2009. VSO Policies and Procedures, Rev. 2.6, § 10.5 (November 30, 2009).

VMEbus International Trade Association (VITA). 2015. VSO Policies and Procedures (September 1, 2015).

Wi-Fi Alliance Intellectual Property Rights Policy. 2016. Wi-Fi Alliance.

Wireless Innovation Forum. 2012. Intellectual Property Policy.

Worldwide Web Consortium. 2004. W3C Patent Policy (February 5, 2004).

Books, Articles and Online Materials

Agénor, Pierre-Richard and Canuto, Otaviano. “2012. Middle-Income Growth Traps” (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 6210, 2012).

Ali, Arif, Nesbitt, Katherine and Wessel, Jane. 2008. “Anti Suit Injunctions in Support of International Arbitration in the United States and the United Kingdom,” International Arbitration Law Review 12.

Allen, D. W. 2011. The Institutional Revolution: Measurement and the Economic Emergence of the Modern World.

Am. Arbitration Assn. 2006. Resolution of Patent Disputes Supplementary Rules.

Am. Arbitration Assn. 2013a. Commercial Arbitration Rules & Mediation Procedures.

Am. Arbitration Assn. 2013b. Drafting Dispute Resolution Clauses. Am. Jur. 2d Proof of Facts 1978.

American Bar Association (ABA). 2007. Committee on Technical Standardization, Section of Science & Technology Law. 2007. Standards Development Patent Policy Manual (Contreras, Jorge L., ed., ABA Publishing).

American Bar Association (ABA). 2011. Handbook on Antitrust Aspects of Standard Setting (2nd ed., ABA Publishing).

Andewelt, Roger B. 1985. “Analysis of Patent Pools under the Antitrust Laws,” 53 Antitrust Law Journal 611.

Andreessen, Marc. 2011. “Why Software Is Eating the World,” Wall Street Journal, August 20, 2011.

Aoki, Reiko and Nagaoka, Sadao. 2005. “Coalition Formation for a Consortium Standard through a Standard Body and a Patent Pool: Theory and Evidence from MPEG2, DVD and 3G” (Inst. of Innovation Research, Hitotsubashi Univ., Working Paper, No 05-01, IIR, 2005).

Aoki, Reiko and Schiff, Aaron. 2008. “Promoting Access to Intellectual Property: Patent Pools, Copyright Collectives and Clearinghouses,” 38 R&D Management 189.

Aranoff, Shara. 2015. “Lessons From 5 Years of Public Interest Delegation at the ITC,” Law 360.

Areeda, Phillip E. and Hovenkamp, Herbert. 2014. Antitrust Law: An Analysis of Antitrust Principles and Their Application (4th ed. 2014).

Armstrong, Ann K., Mueller, Joseph J. and Syrett, Tim. 2014. “The Smartphone Royalty Stack: Surveying Royalty Demands for the Components Within Modern Smartphones,” http://ssrn.com/abstract=2443848 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2443848.

Axelrod, Robert. 1981. “The Emergence of Cooperation among Egoists.” 75 The American Political Science Review 306.

Baer, William. 2015. Remarks at the 19th Annual International Bar Association Competition Conference: Reflections on the Role of Competition Agencies When Patents Become Essential.

Baldwin, Carliss Y. and Clark, Kim B.. 2000. Design Rules: The Power of Modularity. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Balto, David A. and Prywes, Daniel I.. 2002. “Standard-Setting Disputes: The Need for FTC Guidelines,” FTC Watch, July 1, 2002.

Banasevic, Nicholas. 2015. “The Implications of the Court of Justice’s Huawei/ZTE Judgment.” 6 Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 463.

Barceló, John J. 2007. “Anti-Foreign-Suit Injunctions to Enforce Arbitration Agreements,” Cornell Law Sch. Legal Stud. Res. Paper Series, October 17, 2007.

Baron, Justus and Gupta, Kirti. 2015. “Unpacking 3GPP Standards,” working paper. www.law.northwestern.edu/research-faculty/searlecenter/innovationeconomics/documents/Baron_Gupta_Unpacking_3gpp_Standards.pdf.

Baron, Justus, Pentheroudakis, Chryssoula and Thumm, Nikolaus. 2016 “FRAND Licensing in Theory and in Practice: Proposal for a Common Framework,” Competition Policy International Sept. 2016. www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/CPI-Chronicle-Baron-Pentheroudakis-Thumm-final.pdf.

Baron, Justus and Pohlmann, Tim. 2015. “The Effect of Patent Pools on Patenting and Innovation – Evidence from Contemporary Technology Standards,” Northwestern Univ. Searle Center, Working Paper 2015–049, February 2, 2015.

Baron, Justus, Pohlmann, Tim and Blind, Knut. 2016. “Essential patents and standard dynamics,” 45 Research Policy 1762.

Baron, Justus A. and Pentheroudakis, Chryssoula. 2017. JRC Science for Policy Report: Licensing Terms of Standard Essential Patents: A Comprehensive Analysis of Cases, Nikolaus Thumm ed. Seville, Spain: European Commission, Joint Research Center. http://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC104068/jrc104068%20online.pdf.

Baron, Justus and Spulber, Daniel F.. 2015. “The Searle Center Database of Technology Standards and Standard Setting Organizations” (working paper).

Bartlett, Jason R. and Contreras, Jorge L.. 2017. “Rationalizing FRAND Royalties: Can Interpleader Save the Internet of Things?” 36 The Review of Litigation 285.

Bekkers, Rudi. 2015. “Concerns and Evidence for ex-post hold-up with essential patents,” SSRN Working Paper. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2663939.

Bekkers, Rudi, Bongard, Rene and Nuvolari, Alessandro. 2011. “An empirical study on the determinants of essential patent claims in compatibility standards,” 40 Research Policy 1001.

Bekkers, Rudi, Duysters, Geert and Verspagen, Bart. 2002. “Intellectual Property Rights, strategic technology agreements and market structure: The case of GSM,” 31 Research Policy 1141.

Bekkers, Rudi, Iversen, Eric and Blind, Knut. 2012. “Emerging coordination mechanisms for multi-party IPR holders: linking research with standardization,” 21 Industrial and Corporate Change 4.

Bekkers, Rudi and Smits, Jan. 1997. Mobile Telecommunications: Standards, Regulation, and Applications. Deventer, Netherlands: Kluwer BedrijfsInformatie (English trans. 1999, London: Artech House).

Bekkers, Rudi and Updegrove, Andrew. 2012. “A Study of IPR Policies and Practices of a Representative Group of Standard Setting Organizations Worldwide,” Presented at National Academies of Science Symposium on Management of IP in Standards-Setting Processes. http://sites.nationalacademies.org/xpedio/groups/pgasite/documents/webpage/pga_072197.pdf.

Bekkers, Rudi, Verspagen, Bart and Smits, Jan. 2002. “Intellectual Property Rights and Standardization: the case of GSM,” 26 Telecommunications Policy 171.

Bekkers, Rudi and West, Joel. 2009. “The Limits to IPR Standardization Policies as Evidenced by Strategic Patenting in UMTS,” 33 Telecommunications Policy 80.

Berger, Florian, Blind, Knut and Thumm, Nikolaus. 2012. “Filing behaviour regarding essential patents in industry standards,” 41 Research Policy 216.

Bermann, George A. 1990. “The Use of Anti-Suit Injunctions in International Litigation,” 28 Columbia Journal of Transactional Law 589.

Bernstein, Lisa. 1992. “Opting out of the legal system: Extralegal contractual relations in the diamond industry,” 21 The Journal of Legal Studies 115.

Bernstein, Lisa. 2001. “Private commercial law in the cotton industry: Creating cooperation through rules, norms, and institutions,” 99 Michigan Law Review 1724.

Besen, Stanley M. 1990. “The European Telecommunications Standards Institute: A preliminary analysis,” 14 Telecommunications Policy 521.

Besen, Stanley M. and Farrell, Joseph. 1994. “Choosing How to Compete: Strategies and Tactics in Standardization,” 8 Journal of Economic Perspectives 2.

Besen, Stanley M. and Levinson, Robert J.. 2009. “Standards, Intellectual Property Disclosure, and Patent Royalties After Rambus,” 10 North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology 233.

Besen, Stanley M. and Levinson, Robert J.. 2011. “Economic Remedies for Anticompetitive Hold-up: The Rambus Cases,” 56 Antitrust Bulletin 3.

Bessen, James and Meurer, Michael. 2008. Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Biddle, Brad. 2015. “Five Reasons Why Patent Disclosure in Standards-Setting Organizations Doesn’t Work (and What to Do Instead),” SSRN. ssrn.com/abstract=2669893 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2669893.

Biddle, Brad, et al. 2012. “The Expanding Role and Importance of Standards in the Information and Communications Technology Industry,” 52 Jurimetrics Journal 177.

Biddle, Brad, White, Andrew and Woods, Sean. 2010. “How Many Standards in a Laptop? (And Other Empirical Questions),” 2010 Int’l Telecomm. Union, Proceedings Of The 2010 ITU-T Kaleidoscope Academic Conference: Beyond The Internet? www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/opb/proc/t-proc-kalei-2010-pdf-e.pdf.

Blair, Roger D. and Cotter, Thomas F.. 2005. Intellectual Property: Economic and Legal Dimensions of Rights and Remedies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Blind, Knut. 2004. The Economics of Standards: Theory, Evidence, Policy. London: Edward Elgar.

Blind, Knut. 2011. “An Economic Analysis of Standards Competition: The Example of the ISO ODF and OOXML Standards,” 35 Telecommunications Policy 30.

Blind, Knut. 2016. “The impact of standardisation and standards on innovation,” in Edler, Jakob, Cunningham, Paul, Gök, Abdullah and Shapira, Philip, eds., Handbook of Innovation Policy Impact. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Blind, Knut, et al. 2011. Study on the Interplay between Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). Luxembourg: European Commission.

Blind, Knut, Gauch, Stephan and Hawkins, Richard. 2010. “How stakeholders assess the impacts of ICT standards,” 34 Telecommunications Policy 162.

Blind, Knut and Jungmittag, Andre. 2008. “The Impact of Standards and Patents on Macroeconomic Growth: A Panel Approach Covering Four Countries and Twelve Sectors,” Journal of Productivity Analysis 1(51).

Blind, Knut, Jungmittag, Andre and Mangelsdorf, Axel. 2011. “The Economic Benefits of Standardization: An update of the study carried out by DIN in 2000,” DIN German Institute for Standardization, Berlin.

Blind, Knut and Mangelsdorf, Axel. 2013. “Alliance Formation of SMEs: Empirical Evidence from Standardization Committees,” 60 IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 148.

Blind, Knut and Mangelsdorf, Axel. 2016. “Motives to standardise Empirical evidence from Germany,” 48 Technovation 13.

Blum, Brian A. 2004. Contracts: Examples and Explanations (3d ed.).

BMI. 2015. BMI Reports Record-Breaking Revenues of Over $1 Billion. www.bmi.com/news/entry/bmi_reports_record_breaking_revenues_of_over_1_billion.

BMI. 2016. About. www.bmi.com/about.

Bohannan, Christina and Hovenkamp, Herbert. 2010. “IP and Antitrust: Reformation and Harm,” 51 Boston College Law Review 905.

Boutin, Aleksandra, 2016. “Screening for Good Patent Pools through Price Caps on Individual Licenses,” 8 American Economic Journal: Microeconomics 64.

Brankin, Sean-Paul, de Ugarte, Salomé Cisnal and Kimmel, Lisa. 2016. “Huawei/ZTE: Towards a More Demanding Standard of Abuse in Essential Patent Cases,” 7 Journal of European Competition Law & Practice 520.

Brenner, Steffen. 2009. “Optimal Formation Rules for Patent Pools,” 40 Economic Theory 373.

Brenning, Magdalena. 2002. “Competition & Intellectual Property Policy Implications of Late or No IPR Disclosure in Collective Standard-Setting,” Brussels Speech. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/speeches/text/sp2002_037_en.pdf.

Bresnahan, Timothy and Trajtenberg, Manuel. 1995. “General Purpose Technologies: ‘Engines of Growth’?,” 65 Journal of Econometrics 83.

Bresnahan, Timothy and Greenstein, Shane. 1999. “Technological Competition and the Structure of the Computer Industry,” 47 Journal of Industrial Economics 1.

Brodie, Alexandra and Dunnill, Emma. 2015 Unwired Planet’s LTE SEP Found Valid, Infringed and Essential by U.K. High Court, World Intell. Prop. Report.

Brooks, Roger G. and Geradin, Damien. 2011. “Taking Contracts Seriously: The Meaning of the Voluntary Commitment to Licence Essential Patents on ‘Fair and Reasonable’ Terms,” in Anderman, Steven and Ezrachi, Ariel, eds., Intellectual Property and Competition Law: New Frontiers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Brooks, Roger G. and Geradin, Damien. 2011b. “Interpreting and Enforcing the Voluntary FRAND Commitment,” 9 International Journal of IT Standards and Standardization Research 1 (Jan.–Jun. 2011).

Bryan, Gharad, Karlan, Dean and Nelson, Scott. 2010. “Commitment devices,” 2 Annual Review of Economics 671.

Burton, Bruce W., Weingust, Scott and Newman, David L.. 2012. “New ADR Process Facilitates Call by Judges Rader and Posner for Better use of Damages Experts in Patent Litigation,” 2012 Stout Risius Ross (SRR) Journal 118.

Bussel, Daniel J. and Rosett, Arthur I.. 2011. Contract Law and Its Application (8th ed.).

Büthe, Tim and Mattli, Walter. 2011. The New Global Rulers: The Privatization of Regulation in the World Economy. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

Cabral, Luis and Salant, David. 2014. “Evolving technologies and standards regulation,” 36 International Journal of Industrial Organization 48.

Camesasca, Peter, Langus, Gregor, Neven, Damien and Treacy, Pat. 2013. “Injunctions for Standard Essential Patents: Justice is not Blind,” 9 Journal of Competition Law and Economics 285.

Carlson, Steven C. 1999. “Patent Pools and the Antitrust Dilemma,” 16 Yale Journal on Regulation 359.

Carlton, Dennis and Perloff, Jeffery. 2004. Modern Industrial Organization (4th Edition). Pearson.

Carlton, Dennis and Shampine, Allan. 2013. “An Economic Interpretation of FRAND,” 9 Journal of Competition Law & Economics 531.

Carlton, Dennis and Shampine, Allan. 2014. “Identifying Benchmarks for Applying Non-Discrimination in FRAND,” Antitrust Chronicle, August 2014.

Carrier, Michael A. 2003. “Resolving the Patent-Antitrust Paradox Through Tripartite Innovation,” 56 Vanderbilt Law Review 1047.

Carrier, Michael A. 2009, Innovation for the 21st Century: Harnessing the Power of Intellectual Property and Antitrust Law. Oxford: Oxford Press.

Cary, George S., Nelson, Mark W., Kaiser, Steven J. and Sistla, Alex R.. 2011. “The Case for Antitrust Law to Police the Patent Holdup Problem in Standard Setting,” 77 Antitrust Law Journal 913.

Cebr. 2015. The Economic Contribution of Standards to the UK Economy. London: BSI London.

Chandler, Alfred.D. 1990. Scale and Scope, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism. Massachusetts: The Belknap Press.

Chang, Austin, 2017. “Yes, You Can Get an Injunction in a SEP Case in China,” China Patent Blog, March 31, 2017. www.chinapatentblog.com/blog/guest-post-yes-you-can-get-an-injunction-in-a-sep-case-in-china.

Chappatte, Philippe. 2009. “FRAND Commitments – The Case for Antitrust Intervention,” 5 European Competition Journal 319.

Chien, Colleen. V. 2014. “Holding Up and Holding Out,” 21 Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review 1.

Chien, Colleen V. and Lemley, Mark A.. 2012. “Patent Holdup, the ITC, and the Public Interest,” 98 Cornell Law Review 1.

Choi, Jay Pil. 2010. “Patent Pools and Cross-Licensing in the Shadow of Patent Litigation,” 51 International Economic Review 441.

Choi, Jay Pil and Gerlach, Heiko. 2015. “Patent pools, litigation, and innovation,” 46 RAND Journal Economics 499.

Coase, Ronald. 1991. Ronald H. Coase’s speech at the Nobel Banquet (December 10, 1991).

Cohen, Jerome. 2016. “A Looming Crisis for China’s Legal System: Talented Judges and Lawyers are Leaving the Profession, as Ideology Continues to Trump the Rule of Law,” Foreign Policy, February 22, 2016.

Computer and Communications Industry Ass’n. 2010. Open Standards. www.ccianet.org/issues/intellectual-property/open-standards/.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2011. “Equity, Antitrust and the Reemergence of the Patent Unenforceability Remedy,” Antitrust Source, October 2011.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2012a. “Standards, Patents and the National Smart Grid,” 32 Pace Law Review 641.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2012b. “Good Things Come in Threes? DOJ, FTC and EC Officials Wax Eloquent About FRAND,” Patently-O, October 29, 2012.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2013a. “Technical Standards and Ex Ante Disclosure: Results and Analysis of an Empirical Study,” 53 Jurimetrics 163.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2013b. “Fixing FRAND: A Pseudo-Pool Approach to Standards-Based Patent Licensing,” 79 Antitrust Law Journal 47.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2015a. “A Market Reliance Theory for FRAND Commitments and other Patent Pledges,” 2015 Utah Law Review 479.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2015b. “A Brief History of FRAND: Analyzing Current Debates in Standard Setting and Antitrust through a Historical Lens,” 80 Antitrust Law Journal 39.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2015c. “Patent Pledges,” 47 Arizona State Law Journal 543.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2015d. “Standards, Royalty Stacking, and Collective Action,” 3 CPI Antitrust Chronicle, March 2015.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2016a. “A Tale of Two Networks: Patents, Standards and the Internet,” 93 Denver Law Review 833.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2016b. “When a Stranger Calls: Standards Outsiders and Unencumbered Patents,” 12 Journal of Competition Law & Economics 507.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2016c. “FRAND Market Failure: IPXI’s Standards-Essential Patent License Exchange,” 15 Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property 419.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2017a. “From Private Ordering to Public Law: The Legal Framework Governing Standards-Essential Patents,” 30 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 211.

Contreras, Jorge L. 2017b. “Aggregated Royalties For Top-Down FRAND Determinations: Revisiting ‘Joint Negotiation’,” 62 Antitrust Bulletin (forthcoming).

Contreras, Jorge L. 2017c. “Global Markets, Competition and FRAND Royalties: The Many Implications of Unwired Planet v. Huawei.” 16 Antitrust Source (August 2017).

Contreras, Jorge L., Chien, Colleen, Cotter, Thomas and Biddle, Brad. 2016. “Study Proposal – Commercial Patent Licensing Data,” SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2755706.

Contreras, Jorge L., Gaessler, Fabian, Helmers, Christian and Love, Brian. 2017. “Litigation of Standards-Essential Patents in Europe: A Comparative Analysis,” 32 Berkeley Technology Law Journal (forthcoming).

Contreras, Jorge L. and Gilbert, Richard J.. 2015. “A Unified Framework for RAND and other Reasonable Royalties,” 30 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1447.

Contreras, Jorge L. and Newman, David L.. 2014. “Developing a Framework for Arbitrating Standards-Essential Patent Disputes,” 2014 Journal of Dispute Resolution 23.

Cook, Trevor and Garcia, Alejando. 2010. International Intellectual Property Arbitration. Kluwer Law International.

Cook, William. 2016. “FRAND or foe,” ManagingIP.com. June 1, 2016. www.managingip.com/Article/1254371/FRAND-or-foe.html.

Cooter, Robert D. (1996). “Decentralized Law for a Complex Economy: The Structural Approach to Adjudicating the New Law Merchant,” 144 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1643.

Corbin, Arthur Linton. 1993. Corbin on Contracts (Perillo, Joseph M. ed., rev. ed. 1993).

Cotter, Thomas F. 2009. “Patent Holdup, Patent Remedies, and Antitrust Responses,” 34 Journal of Corporate Law 1151.

Cotter, Thomas F. 2011. “Four Principles for Calculating Reasonable Royalties in Patent Infringement Litigation,” 27 Santa Clara Computer & High Technology Law Journal 725.

Cotter, Thomas F. 2014. “Comparative Law and Economics of Standard-Essential Patents and FRAND Royalties,” 22 Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal 311.

Cotter, Thomas F. 2017. “Patent Damages Heuristics,” Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal (forthcoming 2017).

Cotter, Thomas F., 2017a. “Beijing IP Court Awards Injunction, RMB 9 Million for Alleged Infringement of SEP,” Comparative Patent Remedies Blog, March 22, 2017. http://comparativepatentremedies.blogspot.com/2017/03/beijing-ip-court-awards-injunction-rmb.html.

Cotter, Thomas F., 2017b. “Text of Beijing IP Court Decision (in Chinese),” Comparative Patent Remedies Blog, March 23, 2017. http://comparativepatentremedies.blogspot.com/2017/03/text-of-beijing-ip-court-decision-in.html.

Cotter, Thomas F., 2017c. “Translation of Abridged Version of IWNCOMM v. Sony Judgment,” Comparative Patent Remedies Blog, April 8, 2017. http://comparativepatentremedies.blogspot.com/2017/04/translation-of-abridged-version-of.html.

Cournot, Augustin. 1838. Researches into the Mathematical Principles of the Theory of Wealth (Nathaniel T. Bacon, trans., The MacMillan Co.).

Coury, Larry. 2003. “C’est What? Saisie! A Comparison of Patent Infringement Remedies Among the G7 Economic Nations” 13 Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal 1001.

Crane, Daniel A. 2008–2009. “Linkline’s Institutional Suspicions,” Cato Supreme Court Review.

Crane, Daniel A. 2010. “Patent Pools, RAND Commitments, and the Problematics of Price Discrimination,” in Dreyfuss, Rochelle C. et al. eds., Working Within the Boundaries of Intellectual Property: Innovation Policy for the Knowledge Society.

Cyber Creative Institute Co. Ltd. 2013. Evaluation of LTE essential patents declared to ETSI (ver. 3.0). http://cybersoken.com/research/pdf/lte03EN.pdf.

Dagen, Richard. 2010. “Rambus, Innovation Efficiency, and Section 5 of the FTC Act,” 90 Boston University Law Review 1479.

Dannelind, Tomas. 2010. “Licensing 26-26,” Presentation to Swedish Network for Innovation & Technology Transfer Support (SNITTS).

David, Paul A. and Greenstein, Shane. 1990. “The Economics of Compatibility Standards: An Introduction to Recent Research,” 1 Economic Innovation New Technology 3.

Dawson, John P. et al. 2008. Contracts: Cases and Comments. Chicago: Foundation Press.

de Carvalho, Nuno Pires. 2015. “Technical Standards, Intellectual Property, and Competition-A Holistic View,” 47 Washington University Journal of Law and Policy 61.

de Coale, Margarita Trevino. 1999. “Stay, Dismiss, Enjoin, or Abstain?: A Survey of Foreign Parallel Litigation in the Federal Courts of the United States,” 17 Boston University International Law Journal 79.

de Coster, Charles. 2002. “Germany,” in Jolly, Adam and Philpott, James, eds. The Handbook of European Intellectual Property Management. London: Kogan Page.

de Vries, Henk J. 2006. Standards for Business – How Companies Benefit from Participation in International Standards Setting. www.iec.ch/about/globalreach/academia/pdf/vries-1.pdf.

Decker, Susan, 2016. “InterDigital Says China Made Threats Over Patent Dispute,” Bloomberg, December 17, 2013.

Deng, Fei and Leonard, Gregory K., 2013. “The Role of China’s Unique Economic Characteristics in Antitrust Enforcement,” Emch, Adrian and Stallibrass, David eds. China’s Anti-Monopoly Law – The First Five Years. Wolters Kluwer.

Deng, Fei and Sun, Su, 2014. “Determining the FRAND Rate: U.S. Perspectives on Huawei v. InterDigital,” Competition Policy International, February 2014. www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/file/view/7124.

Department of Trade and Industry. 2005. “The Empirical Economics of Standards,” DTI Economics Paper No. 12.

Dolmans, Maurits. 2002. “Standards for Standards,” 26 Fordham International Law Journal 163.

Durie, Daralyn J. and Lemley, Mark A.. 2010. “A Structured Approach to Calculating Reasonable Royalties,” 14 Lewis & Clark Law Review 627.

Dworkin, Ronald M. 1967. “The Model of Rules” (1967). Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 3609.

Dwyer, F. Robert, Schurr, Paul H, and Oh, Sejo. 1987. “Developing Buyer-Seller Relationships,” 51 The Journal of Marketing 11.

Edlin, Aaron S. and Harris, Robert G.. 2013. “The Role of Switching Costs in Antitrust Analysis: A Comparison of Microsoft and Google,” 15 Yale Journal of Law and Technology 169.

Eltzroth, Carter. 2008. “IPR Policy of the DVB Project: Negative Disclosure, FRAND Arbitration Unless Pool Rules OK, Part 1,” 6 International Journal of IT Standards & Standardization Research 21.

Epstein, Richard A. 2008. Antitrust Consent Decrees in Theory and Practice: Why Less is More. AIE Press.

Ernst, Dieter. 2011. Indigenous Innovation and Globalization: The Challenge for China’s Standardization Strategy. La Jolla, CA: UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation; Honolulu: East-West Center.

Evans, Sir William. 1817. A Collection of Statutes Connected With The General Administration of Law. London: Butterworths.

Ewing, Tom. 2012, “Indirect Exploitation of Intellectual Property Rights by Corporations and Investors,” 4 Hastings Science and Technology Law Journal 34.

Fairfield Resources International. 2008. Analysis of Patents Declared as Essential to GSM as of June 6, 2007 http://frlicense.com/GSM_FINAL.pdf.

Fairfield Resources International. 2009. Review of Patents Declared as Essential to WCDMA Through December, 2008.

Fairfield Resources International. 2010. Review of Patents Declared as Essential to LTE and SAE (4G Wireless Standards) Through June 30, 2009. www.frlicense.com/LTE%20Final%20Report.pdf.

Farnsworth, E. Allan 2004. Contracts, 4th ed. 2004. Aspen Publishers.

Farrell, Joseph. 1987 “Cheap talk, coordination, and entry,” 18 RAND Journal of Economics 34.

Farrell, Joseph, Hayes, John, Shapiro, Carl and Sullivan, Theresa. 2007. “Standard Setting, Patents and Hold-Up,” 74 Antitrust Law Journal 603.

Farrell, Joseph and Klemperer, Paul. 2007. “Coordination and Lock-in: Competition with Switching Costs and Network Effects,” in Armstrong, Mark and Porter, Robert H., eds., Handbook of Industrial Organization. New York: Elsevier.

Farrell, Joseph and Saloner, Garth. 1988. “Coordination through Committees and Markets,” 19 RAND Journal of Economics 235.

Farrell, Joseph and Shapiro, Carl. 1992. “Standard Setting in High Definition Television,” Brookings Papers: Microeconomics.

Farrell, Joseph and Shapiro, Carl. 2008. “How Strong are Weak Patents,” 98 American Economic Review 4.

Farrell, Joseph and Simcoe, Timothy. 2012. “Choosing the Rules for Consensus Standardization,” 43 RAND Journal of Economics 235.

Federal Labs. 2017. FAQs. www.federallabs.org/home/faqs/.

Feldman, Robin. 2013. “Intellectual Property Wrongs,” 18 Stanford Journal of Law, Business & Finance 250.

First, Harry, 2016. “Exploitative Abuses of Intellectual Property Rights,” New York University Law & Economics Working Papers. Paper 446. http://lsr.nellco.org/nyu_lewp/446.

Foer, Albert A. and Vaheesan, Sandeep. 2013. American Antitrust Institute Request for Joint Enforcement Guidelines on the Patent Policies of Standard Setting Organizations.

FOSS Patents. 2013. “Apple to FTC: Samsung and Google lose most of their cases over declared-essential patents,” FOSS Patents, February 2013. www.fosspatents.com/2013/02/apple-to-ftc-samsungand-google-lose.html.

Fox, Douglas and Weinstein, Roy. 2012. “Arbitration and Intellectual Property Disputes,” Micronomics, April 19, 2012. www.micronomics.com/articles/Arbitration_and_Intellectual_Property_Disputes.pdf.

FRAND Roundtable. 2008. Global Competition Review. http://globalcompetitionreview.com/article/1038788/frand-roundtable.

Fugate, Wilbur L. 1996. Foreign Commerce and the Antitrust Laws. Aspen Publishers.

Galetovic, Alexander, Haber, Stephen and Levine, Ross. 2014. “Do Patent Holders Holdup Innovation?” Hoover IP2 Working Paper Series No. 14011.

Galetovic, Alexander, Haber, Stephen and Levine, Ross. 2015. “An Empirical Examination of Patent Hold up,” 11 J. Competition L. & Econ. 549.

Gawer, Annabelle. 2014. “Bridging Differing Perspectives on Technological Platforms: Toward an Integrative Framework,” 43 Research Policy 7.

Gawer, Annabelle and Cusomano, Michael A. 2013. “Industry Platforms and Ecosystem Innovation,” 31 Journal of Product Innovation Management 417.

Geradin, Damien. 2009. “Pricing Abuses by Essential Patent Holders in A Standard-Setting Context: A View from Europe,” 76 Antitrust Law Journal 329.

Geradin, Damien. 2014. “The Meaning of ‘Fair and Reasonable’ in the Context of Third-Party Determination of FRAND Terms.” 21 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 919.

Geradin, Damien. 2016a. “FRAND Arbitration: The Determination of Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory Rates for SEPs by Arbitral Tribunals,” 3 Antitrust Chronicle 1.

Geradin, Damien. 2016b. “Patent Assertion Entities and EU Competition Law.” George Mason Law & Economics Research Paper No. 16-08.

Geradin, Damien and Elhauge, Einer. 2007. Global Antitrust Law & Economics. Foundation Press.

Geradin, Damien, Layne-Farrar, and Padilla, A. Jorge. 2008. “The complements problem within standard setting: assessing the evidence on royalty stacking,” 14 Boston University Journal of Science and Technology Law 2.

Geradin, Damien, Layne-Farrar, and Padilla, A. Jorge. 2008. “Competing Away Market Power? An Economic Assessment of Ex Ante Auctions In Standard Setting,” 4 European Competition Journal 443.

Ghosh, R.A. 2005. An Economic Basis for Open Standards. Maastricht: European Commission.

Ghosh, Shubha and Sokol, D. Daniel. 2016. “FRAND in India,” SSRN. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2718256&download=yes.

Gifford, Daniel J. and Kudrle, Robert T.. 2010. “The Law and Economics of Price Discrimination in Modern Economies: Time for Reconciliation?,” 43 University of California Davis Law Review 1235.

Gilbert, Richard J. 2004. “Antitrust for Patent Pools: A Century of Policy Evolution,” 2004 Stanford Technology Law Journal 3.

Gilbert, Richard J. 2010a. “Ties That Bind: Policies to Promote (Good) Patent Pools,” 77 Antitrust Law Journal 1.

Gilbert, Richard J. 2010b. “The Essentiality Test for Patent Pools,” in Dreyfuss, Rochelle C., First, Harry and Zimmerman, Diane L. eds., Working within the Boundaries of Intellectual Property: Innovation Policy for the Knowledge Society.

Gilbert, Richard J. 2011. “Deal or No Deal? Licensing Negotiations in Standard-Setting Organizations,” 77 Antitrust Law Journal 855.

Gilbert, Richard J. 2014. “Competition Policy for Industry Standards,” in Blair, Roger D. and Sokol, D. Daniel eds., Oxford Handbook on International Antitrust Economics.

Gilbert, Richard J. and Katz, Michael. 2006. “Should Good Patents Come in Small Packages? A Welfare Analysis of Intellectual Property Bundling,” 24 International Journal of Industrial Organizations 931.

Ginsburg, Douglas H., Owings, Taylor M. and Wright, Joshua D.. 2014. “Enjoining Injunctions: The Case Against Antitrust Liability for Standard Essential Patent Holders Who Seek Injunctions,” Antitrust Source, October 28, 2014.

Ginsburg, Douglas, Wong-Ervin, Koren and Wright, Joshua. 2015. “The Troubling Use of Antitrust to Regulate FRAND Licensing,” 10 CPI Antitrust Chronicle 2.

Robinson, Glen O.. 2004. “Personal Property Servitudes,” 71 University of Chicago Law Review 1449.

Golden, John. 2013. “Patent Privateers: Private Enforcement’s Historical Survivors,” 26 Harvard J. L. & Tech. 545.

Goldman, David. 2012. “Google seals $13 billion Motorola buy,” CNN Money, May 22, 2012. http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/22/technology/google-motorola/https://www.wsgr.com/publications/PDFSearch/sher-august-12.pdf.

Gotts, Illene Knable and Sher, Scott. 2012. “The Particular Antitrust Concerns with Patent Acquisitions,” Competition Law International, August 2002. www.wsgr.com/publications/PDFSearch/sher-august-12.pdf.

Goulet, Paul C. and Riley, P. Andrew. 2010. “An Option For Public Interest Factfinding at the Commission,” 337 Reporter.

Grasso, Roberto. 2016. “The ECJ Ruling in Huawei and the Right to Seek Injunctions Based on FRAND-Encumbered SEPs under EU Competition Law: One Step Forward,” 39 World Competition 213.

Greenbaum, Eli. 2015. “Forgetting FRAND: The WIPO Model Submission Agreements,” les Nouvelles, June 2015 at 81.

Grewal, David Singh. 2008. Network Power: The Social Dynamics of Globalization. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press.

Greif, Avner, Milgrom, Paul and Weingast, Barry R. 1994. “Coordination, Commitment, and Enforcement: The Case of the Merchant Guild,” 102 The Journal of Political Economy 745.

GTW Assoc. 2015. Evolution of the ANSI Patent Policy. www.gtwassociates.com/answers/evolutionansipolicy.html#1969.

Gupta, Kirti and Snyder, Mark. 2014. “Smart Phone Litigation and Standard Essential Patents,” Hoover Institution Working Paper 14006.

Gupta, Kirti. 2015. “FRAND in India: Emerging Developments,” Antitrust in Emerging and Developing Counties | Conference Papers. http://awards.concurrences.com/IMG/pdf/gupta_-_nyu_2015_proofs.pdf.

Hartley, Trevor C. 2015. International Commercial Litigation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

HDBaseT. 2017. What is HDBaseT. http://hdbaset.org/what-is-hdbaset/.

Heller, Michael A. and Eisenberg, Rebecca. 1998. “Can Patents Deter Innovation? The Anticommons in Biomedical Research,” 280 Science 698.

Hergueux, Jérôme, Jacquemet, Nicolas, Luchini, Stéphane and Shogren, Jason F.. 2016. “Leveraging the Honor Code: Public Goods Contributions under Oath,” PSE Working Papers no. 2016–22.

Herman, Michele. 2010. “Negotiating Standards-Related Patent Licenses How the Deal Is Done,” Landslide 3(1).

Hesse, Renata B. 2009. “Section 2 Remedies and U.S. v. Microsoft: What Is to Be Learned?,” 75 Antitrust Law Journal 847.

Hesse, Renata B. 2013. Speech at the Global Competition Review’s 2nd Annual Antitrust Law Leaders Forum.

Hesse, Renata B. 2014. “A Year in the Life of the Joint DOJ-PTO Policy Statement on Remedies for F/RAND Encumbered Standards-Essential Patents,” Remarks at the Global Competition Review GCR Live IP & Antitrust USA Conference.

Hillel, Jonathan. 2010. “Standards x Patents / Antitrust = ∞: The Inadequacy of Antitrust to Address Patent Ambush,” 17 Duke Law and Technology Review 1.

Hofmann, Herwig C.H., Rowe, Gerard C. and Türk, Alexander H.. 2011. Administrative Law and Policy of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hooneman, Willem. 2013. “Patent Litigation in Netherlands” in Beckett, Nick and Morton, Jeremy, eds. CMS International Patent Litigation Guide. https://cms.law/en/NLD/Publication/International-Patent-Litigation-Guide.

Hovenkamp, Herbert. 2011. “Antitrust and Innovation: Where We Are and Where We Should Be Going,” 77 Antitrust Law Journal 749.

Hussinger, Katrin and Schwiebacher, Franz. 2015. “The market value of technology disclosures to standard setting organizations,” 22 Industry and Innovation 321.

ICN. 2003. Recommended Practices for Merger Notification and Review Procedures. www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/uploads/library/doc588.pdf.

Imation 2015. Press Release of Imation K.K. (September 29, 2015). http://imation.co.jp/info/notice/pdf/20150929_imation_business_.pdf.

Int’l Property Owners Ass’n. 2009. Standards Primer: An Overview of Standards Setting Bodies and Patent-Related Issues that Arise in the Context of Standard Setting Activities. www.ipo.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/IPOStandardsPrimer.pdf.

Int’l Trade Comm’n Trial Lawyers Ass’n. 2017. Frequently Asked Questions. www.itctla.org/resources/faqs.

Intellectual Property Exchange International, Inc. 2016., MarketsWiki. www.marketswiki.com/wiki/Intellectual_Property_Exchange_International,_Inc.

Isenbergh, Maxwell S. and Rubin, Seymour J.. 1940. “Antitrust Enforcement Through Consent Decrees,” 53 Harvard Law Review 386.

Iversen, Eric. 1999. “Standardization and Intellectual Property Rights: ETSI’s controversial search for new IPR-procedures,” IEEE Conference on Standardisation and Innovation in Information Technology, 15–17 Sept 1999, Aachen, Germany.

Iversen, Eric. 2001. “Patenting and voluntary standards: the tension between the domain of proprietary assets and that of ‘public goods’ in the innovation of new network technologies,” Science Studies 14(2).

Jacobacci, Guido. 1976. “Patents and Patent Enforcement in Italy,” in Gevers, Jacques, ed., Patent law and Practice of the Major European Countries. New York: Seminar Services.

Jacquemet, Nicolas, Joule, Robert-Vincent, Luchini, Stéphane and Shogren, Jason F.. 2013. “Preference Elicitation under Oath,” 65 Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 110.

Jarosz, John C. and Chapman, Michael J.. 2013. “The Hypothetical Negotiation and Reasonable Royalty Damages,” 16 Stanford Technology Law Review 769.

Johns, Adrian. 2009. Piracy: The Intellectual Property Wars from Gutenberg to Gates. Chicago: Chicago Press.

Jones, Alison. 2014. “Standard-essential patents: FRAND commitments, injunctions and the smartphone wars,” 10 European Competition Journal 1.

Joshi, Amol M. and Nerkar, Atul. 2011. “When Do Strategic Alliances Inhibit Innovation By Firms? Evidence from Patent Pools in the Global Optical Disc Industry,” 32 Strategic Management Journal 1139.

Jungmittag, Andre, Blind, Knut and Grupp, Hariolf. 1999. “Innovation, Standardization and the Long-term Production Function: A Co-Integration Approach for Germany,” in Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften.

JurataJr., John and Smith, David. 2013. “Turning the Page: The Next Chapter of Disputes Involving Standard Essential Patents,” CPI Antitrust Chronicle October 2013.

Kanevskaia, Olia and Zingales, Nicolo. 2016. IEEE IP Policy Update Under the Scrutiny of the EC Guidelines on Horizontal Cooperation. Tilburg Law and Economic Center.

Kang, Byeongwoo and Motohashi, Kazuyuki. 2015. “Essential intellectual property rights and inventors´ involvement in standardization,” 44 Research Policy 483.

Kang, Byeongwoo and Bekkers, Rudi. 2015. “Just-in-time patents and the development of standards,” 44 Research Policy 1948.

Kang, Il and Kim, Hee-Eun. 2012. “Enforcement of Competition Law in Standardization and Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights in Korea and Europe,” 161 Journal of Competition 68.

Kapoor, Ankur. 2009. “What is the Standard of Causation of Monopoly?,” Antitrust, Summer 2009.

Karachalios, Konstantinos. 2015. “If it works (for me), why fix it? Status Quo v Reforms at the Intersection between the Patent System and Standardization,” Keynote Speech, IEEE SIIT 2015, Mountain View, California, October 2015.

Kaster, Laura A. 2015. “Confidentiality in U.S. Arbitration,” 5 New York Dispute Resolution Law 23.

Kattan, Joseph and Wood, Chris. 2014. “Standard-Essential Patents and the Problem of Hold-Up,” in Charbit, Nicolas and Ramundo, Elisa, eds., William E. Kovacic, An Antitrust Tribute – Liber Amicorum. New York: Quality Books Inc.

Katz, Avery. 1996. “Taking private ordering seriously,” 144 University of Pennsylvania Law Review 1745.

Katznelson, Ron D. 2015. “Perilous Deviations from FRAND Harmony – Operational Pitfalls of the 2015 IEEE Patent Policy,” IEEE SIIT 2015, 9th International Conf. on Standardization and Innovation in Information Technology, Sunnyvale, CA.

Katznelson, Ron D. 2016. “Decline in non-duplicate licensing Letters of Assurance (LOAs) from Product/System companies for IEEE standards Bi-Level Technologies, Iam Media. www.iam-media.com/files/LOAs-March-2016_stamped.pdf.

Kerr, William. 1867. A Treatise on The Law and Practice of Injunctions in Equity. London: W. Maxwell & Son.

Kesan, Jay P. and Hayes, Carol M.. 2012. “Patent Transfers in the Information Age: FRAND Commitments and Transparency,” University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign prepared for National Academy of Sciences.

Kesan, Jay P. and Hayes, Carol M.. 2014. “FRAND’s Forever: Standards, Patent Transfers, and Licensing Commitments,” 89 Indiana Law Journal 231.

Khan, B. Zorina. 2013. “Trolls and Other Patent Inventions: Economic History and the Patent Controversy in the Twenty-First Century,” 21 George Mason Law Review 825.

Kim, Sung-Hwan. 2005. “Vertical Structure and Patent Pools,” 25 Review of Industrial Organization 231.

Kim, Yoonhee. 2014. “Lifting Confidentiality of FRAND Royalties in SEP Arbitration,” 16 Columbia Sci. & Tech. L. Rev. 1.

Kingston, William. 2000. “The Case for Compulsory Arbitration – Empirical Evidence,” 22 European Intellectual Property Review 154.

Klein, Benjamin, Crawford, Robert and Alchian, Armen. 1978. “Vertical Integration, Appropriable Rents, and the Competitive Contracting Process,” 21 J.L. & Econ. 297.

Klein, Benjamin and Wiley, John Shepard Jr. 2003. “Competitive Price Discrimination as an Antitrust Justification for Intellectual Property Refusals to Deal,” 70 Antitrust Law Journal 599.

Klein, Benjamin and Murphy, Kevin M.. 2008. “Exclusive Dealing Intensifies Competition for Distribution,” 75 Antitrust Law Journal 433.

Kobayashi, Bruce and Wright, Joshua. 2009. “Federalism, Substantive Preemption & Limits on Antitrust,” 5 Journal of Competition Law and Policy 469.

Kobayashi, Bruce and Wright, Joshua. 2012. “The Limits of Antitrust and Patent Holdup: A Reply to Cary et al.,” 78 Antitrust Law Journal 505.

Korber, Torsten. 2013. Standard-Essential Patents, FRAND Commitments and Competition Law. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

Kovacic, William E. and Winerman, Marc. 2010. “Competition Policy and the Application of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act,” 76 Antitrust Law Journal 929.

Kühn, Kai-Uwe, Morton, Fiona Scott and Shelanski, Howard. 2013. “Standard Setting Organizations Can Help Solve the Standard Essential Patent Licensing Problem,” CPI Antitrust Chronicle March 2013.

Kühnen, Thomas. 2013. Patent Litigation Proceedings in Germany. Cologne: Carl Heymanns Verlag.

Kurup, Rajesh. 2015. “iBall, Ericsson Settle Patent Issue,” Hindu Business Line, November 20, 2015. www.thehindubusinessline.com/info-tech/iball-ericsson-settle-patent-issue/article7900713.ece.

La Belle, Megan M. 2013. “Against Settlement of (Some) Patent Cases,” 67 Vanderbilt Law Review 375.

Lampe, Ryan and Moser, Petra. 2010. “Do Patent Pools Encourage Innovation? Evidence from the 19th-Century Sewing Machine Industry,” 70 Journal of Economic History 898.

Lampe, Ryan and Moser, Petra. 2013. “Patent Pools and Innovation in Substitute Technologies – Evidence from the 19th Century Sewing Machine Industry,” 44 RAND Journal of Economics 757.

Lampe, Ryan and Moser, Petra. 2016. “Patent Pools, Competition, and Innovation – Evidence from 20 US Industries under the New Deal,” 31 Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 1.

Langus, Gregor, Lipatov, Vilen and Neven, Damien. 2013. “Standard Essential Patents; Who is Really Holding Up (and When)?” 9 Journal of Competition Law & Economics 253.

Larouche, Pierre. 2009. “The European Microsoft case at the crossroads of competition policy and innovation” 75 Antitrust Law Journal 933.

Larouche, Pierre and Chirico, Filomena. 2008. “Conceptual divergence, functionalism and the economics of convergence,” in Prechal, Sacha et al., eds., The Coherence of EU Law. Oxford: Oxford University Publishing.

Larouche, Pierre and van Overwalle, Geertrui. 2015. “Interoperability standards, patents and competition policy,” in Delimatsis, Panos, ed., The Law, Economics and Politics of International Standardization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Publishing.

Larouche, Pierre and Schinkel, Maarten-Pieter. 2014. “Continental Drift in the Treatment of Dominant Firms: Article 102 TFEU in Contrast to § 2 Sherman Act,” in Sokol, Daniel and Blair, Roger, eds., Oxford Handbook of International Antitrust Economics – Vol. 2. Oxford: OUP.

Larouche, Pierre and Zingales, Nicolo. 2014. “Injunctive Relief in Disputes Related to Standard-Essential Patents: Time for the CJEU to Set Fair and Reasonable Presumptions,” 10 European Competition Journal 551.

Larouche, Pierre, Padilla, Jorge and Taffet, Richard. 2014. “Settling FRAND Disputes: Is Mandatory Arbitration a Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory Alternative?,” 10 J. Competition L. & Econ. 581.

Lavine, Michael A. 2008. “Ripples in the Patent Pool: The Impact and Implications of the Evolving Essentiality Analysis,” 4 New York University J.L. & Business 605.

Layne-Farrar, Anne. 2010. “Non-Discriminatory Pricing: Is Standard Setting Different?,” 6 Journal of Competition Law & Economics 811.

Layne-Farrar, Anne. 2011. “An Economic Defense of Flexibility in IPR Licensing: Contracting Around the ‘First Sale’ in Multilevel Production Settings,” 51 Santa Clara Law Review 1149.

Layne-Farrar, Anne 2014a. “Assessing IPR Disclosure Within Standard Setting: An ICT Case Study”, in Modern Trends Surrounding Information Technology Standards and Standardization Within Organizations, Kai Jakobs ed., IGI Global.

Layne-Farrar, Anne. 2014b. “Moving Past The SEP RAND Obsession: Some Thoughts On The Economic Implications Of Unilateral Commitments And The Complexities Of Patent Licensing,” 21 George Mason Law Review 1093.

Layne-Farrar, Anne. 2014c. “Proactive or Reactive? An Empirical Assessment of IPR Policy Revisions in the Wake of Antitrust Actions,” 59 Antitrust Bulletin 373.

Layne-Farrar, Anne and Lerner, Josh. 2011. “To join or not to join: Examining patent pool participation and rent sharing rules,” 29 International Journal of Industrial Organizations 294.

Layne-Farrar, Anne and Wong-Ervin, Koren W.. 2017. “Methodologies for Calculating FRAND Damages: An Economic and Comparative Analysis of the Case Law from China, the European Union, India, and the United States,” Jindal Global Law School Law Review (forthcoming).

Layne-Farrar, Anne, Llobet, Gerard and Padilla, Jorge, 2014. “Participation: The Incentives to Join Cooperative Standard Setting Efforts,” 23 Journal of Economics & Management Strategy 24.

Layne-Farrar, Anne and Salinger, Michael A.. 2017. “The Policy Implications of Licensing Standard Essential FRAND-Committed Patents in Bundles,” in Ashish Bharadwaj et al., eds., Complications and Quandries in the ICT Sector. Springer.

Lee, Nari and Li, Yang, 2015. “European Standards in Chinese Courts – A Case of SEP and FRAND Disputes in China,” in Lee, N., Bruun, N. and Li, M., eds., Governance of Intellectual Property Rights in China and Europe. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Leeson, Peter T. 2006. “Cooperation and Conflict: Evidence on Self-Enforcing Arrangements and Heterogeneous Groups,” 64 American Journal of Economics and Sociology 891.

Lemley, Mark. 2002. “Intellectual Property Rights and Standard-Setting Organizations,” 90 California Law Review 1889.

Lemley, Mark. 2007. “Ten Things to do About Patent Holdup of Standards (And One Not To),” 48 Boston College Law Review 149.

Lemley, Mark A. and McGowan, David. 1998. “Could Java Change Everything? The Competitive Propriety of a Proprietary Standard,” 43 Antitrust Bulletin 715.

Lemley, Mark A. and Shapiro, Carl. 2005. “Probabilistic Patents,” 19 Journal of Economic Perspectives 75.

Lemley, Mark A. and Shapiro, Carl. 2007. “Patent Hold up and Royalty Stacking,” 85 Texas Law Review 1991.

Lerner, Josh and Tirole, Jean. 2004. “Efficient Patent Pools,” 94 American Economic Review 691.

Lerner, Josh and Tirole, Jean. 2005. “The Economics of Technology Sharing: Open Source and Beyond,” 19 Journal of Economic Perspectives 99.

Lerner, Josh and Tirole, Jean. 2008. “Public Policy Toward Patent Pools,” in Jaffe, Adam, Lerner, Josh and Stern, Scott, eds., Innovation Policy and the Economy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Lerner, Josh and Tirole, Jean. 2015. “Standard-Essential Patents,” 123 Journal of Political Economy 547.

Lerner, Josh, Tabakovic, Haris and Tirole, Jean. 2016. “Patent Disclosures and Standard Setting,” NBER Working Paper No. 22768. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2851539.

Leubsdorf, John. 1978. “The Standard for Preliminary Injunctions,” 91 Harvard Law Review 525.

Lim, Daryl. 2011. “Misconduct in Standard Setting: The Case for Patent Misuse,” 51 IDEA 559.

Lim, Daryl. 2016. “Patent holdup,” in Blair, Roger D. and Sokol, D. Daniel eds., Cambridge Handbook of Antitrust, Intellectual Property and High Tech. Cambridge University Press.

Lipsky, Jr., Abbott B. and Sidak, J. Gregory. 1999. “Essential Facilities,” 51 Stanford Law Review 1187.

Llanes, Gaston and Poblete, Joaquin. 2014. “Ex Ante Agreements in Standard Setting and Patent-Pool Formation,” 23 Journal of Economic and Management Strategy 50.

Lloyd, Richard. 2016. “The IEEE’s new patent policy one year on – the battle that’s part of a bigger licensing war,” IAM Media.

Lo, Allen. 2002. Letter from Allen Lo, Deputy General Counsel, Google, to Gordon Day, President, IEEE (February 8, 2012).

Long, David. 2016. “Litigating Standard Essential Patents at the International Trade Commission,” Essential Patent Blog.

Lubman, Stanley B. 1999. Bird in a Cage: Legal Reform in China After Mao. Stanford University Press.

Lundqvist, Björn. 2016. “Post Danmark II, now concluded by the ECJ: clarification of the rebate abuse, but how do we marry Post Danmark I with Post Danmark II?,” 11 European Competition Journal 557.

Macaulay, Stewart. 1963. “Non-contractual relations in business: A preliminary study,” 28 American Sociological Review 55.

Majoras, Deborah Platt. 2005. “Recognizing the Procompetitive Potential of Royalty Discussions In Standard Setting,” Remarks Prepared for Standardization and The Law: Developing The Golden Mean for Global Trade at Stanford University (September 23, 2005).

Manders, Basak, De Vries, Henk and Blind, Knut. 2013. “The relationship between ISO 9001 and financial performance: a meta-analysis,” The 73rd Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management, Orlando, USA.

Manders, Basak, De Vries, Henk and Blind, Knut. 2016. “ISO 9001 and product innovation: A literature review and research framework,” 48 Technovation 41.

Marcus, Philip. 1945. “Antitrust Law and Antitrust Judgments Through Hartford-Empire,” 34 Georgetown L. J. 1.

Mariniello, Mario. 2011. “Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) Terms: A Challenge for Competition Authorities,” 7 Journal of Competition Law and Economics 523.

Masur, Jonathan S. 2015. “The Use and Misuse of Patent Licenses,” 110 Northwestern University Law Review 115.

Mattioli, Michael. 2017. “Data Pools,” 32 Berkeley Technology Law Journal (forthcoming).

Matutes, Carmen and Regibeau, Pierre. 1988. “‘Mix and Match’: product compatibility without network externalities,” 19 RAND Journal of Economics 221.

May, Benjamin and Liens, Marie. 2014. “Brevets Pharmaceutiques: Approche Pratique du Contentieux des Mesures d’Interdiction Provisoire,” 13 Propriété Industrielle 16.

Mehra, Salil and Meng, Yanbei, 2015. “Essential Facilities with Chinese Characteristics: A Different Perspective on the Conditional Compulsory Licensing of Intellectual Property,” 2015 Journal of Antitrust Enforcement 1.

Merges, Robert P. 2000 “Institutions for Intellectual Property Transactions: The Case of Patent Pools,” in Dreyfuss, Rochelle Cooper et al. eds., Expanding the Boundaries of Intellectual Property: Innovation Policy for the Knowledge Society.

Merges, Robert P. 2015. “Looking Backward: Historical Patent Pools and Contemporary Policy,” The Media Institute.

Merges, Robert P. and Kuhn, Jeffrey M.. 2009. “An Estoppel Doctrine for Patented Standards,” 97 California Law Review 1.

Merges, Robert P. and Mattioli, Michael. 2017. “Measuring the Costs and Benefits of Patent Pools,” 77 Ohio State Law Journal (forthcoming).

Merrill, Thomas W. and Smith, Henry E.. 2000. “Optimal Standardization in the Law of Property: The Numerus Clausus Principle,” 110 Yale Law Journal 1.

Meyer, David. 2011. “Nokia Loses 3G Patent Battle in High Court,” ZDNet, June 16, 2011. www.zdnet.com/article/nokia-loses-3g-patent-battle-in-high-court/.

Meyers, Ernest S. and Lewis, Seymour D.. 1941. “The Patent ‘Franchise’ and the Antitrust Laws – Part I,” 30 Georgetown L. J. 117.

Microsoft Corp. 2017. Microsoft’s Support for Industry Standards. www.microsoft.com/en-us/legal/intellectualproperty/IPLicensing/ip2.aspx.

Microsoft Corp. 2012. Microsoft’s Support for Industry Standards, Feb. 8, 2012.

Milgrom, Paul R., North, Douglass C. and Weingast, Barry R. 1990. “The Role of Institutions in the Revival of Trade: The Law Merchant, Private Judges, and the Champagne Fairs,” 2 Economics & Politics 1.

Miller, Benjamin M. 2015. “FRAND-Encumbered SEPs and Injunctions: Why Section 5 of the FTC Act Is an Inappropriate Remedy,” 16 Columbia Science and Technology L. Rev. 452.

Miller, Joseph Scott. 2007. “Standard Setting, Patents, and Access Lock-In: RAND Licensing and the Theory of the Firm,” 40 Indiana Law Review 351.

Moss, Gary. 2014. “HTC v Nokia: In the United Kingdom will an injunction be granted following a finding of patent infringement?,” 9 J. Intellectual Property L. & Practice 351.

Mossoff, Adam. 2014. “The Rise and Fall of the First American Patent Thicket: The Sewing Machine War of the 1850s,” 53 Arizona L. Rev. 165.

Motorola Solutions 2017. A Legacy of Innovation: Timeline of Motorola History Since 1928. www.motorolasolutions.com/en_us/about/company-overview/history/timeline.html

Mueller, Florian. 2011. “How will HTC work around the enforced patent without losing the benefit of IPCom's FRAND declaration?” FOSS Patents, November 29, 2011. www.fosspatents.com/2011/11/how-will-htc-work-around-enforced.html.

Mueller, Florian. “UK High Court Denies a Patent Injunction Against Nokia in Light of a FRAND Commitment,” FOSS Patents. www.fosspatents.com/2012/05/uk-high-court-denies-patent-injunction.html.

Mueller, Jr., Milton. 1996. Universal Service: Competition, Interconnection, and Monopoly in the Making of the American Telephone System. American Enterprise Institute.

Muris, Timothy. 2000. “The FTC and the Law of Monopolization,” 67 Antitrust Law Journal 693.

Murphy, William J. and Orcutt, John L.. 2013. “Using Valuation-Based Decision Making to Increase the Efficiency of China’s Patent Subsidy Strategies,” 2013 Cardozo Law Review 116.

Nancy, Gallini. 2011. “Private Agreements for Coordinating Patent Rights: The Case of Patent Pools,” IEL Paper in Comparative Analysis of Institutions, Economics and Law No. 5, June 2011.

Nanda, Ved P. et al. 2017. Litigation of International Disputes in U.S. Courts. Thomson Reuters.

National Academies of Science (NAS). 2013. Intellectual Property Challenges For Standard-Setting in the Global Economy, Maskus, Keith and Merrill, Stephen A., eds. National Academies Press.

Newman, David L. 2016a. “New Twist On Mediation And Arbitration For PTAB Disputes,” LAW 360. May 10, 2016. www.law360.com/articles/792815/new-twist-on-mediation-and-arbitration-for-ptab-disputes.

Newman, David L. 2016b. “The United States Patent and Trademark Office,” American Bar Association. www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/dispute_resolution/newsletter/mar2016/the_united_states_patent_and_trademark_office.authcheckdam.pdf.

Newman, Matthew and Rosenblatt, Joel. 2009. “Rambus Offers to Settle European Union Antitrust Case (Update 3),” Bloomberg. www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aK08MSmH0Fz4.

North, Douglass C. 1993. “Institutions and credible commitment,” Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE)/Zeitschrift für die gesamte Staatswissenschaft.

NV. 2014. “In Praise of the Humble USB,” Economist, July 13, 2014. www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2014/07/difference-engine-0.

Oberlander, Marissa, Stabe, Martin and Bernard, Steve. 2011. “The Smartphone Patent Wars,” Financial Times. October 17, 2011.

OECD. 2013. Interconnected Economies: Benefiting from Global Value Chains. OECD Synthesis Report. www.oecd.org/sti/ind/interconnected-economies-GVCs-synthesis.pdf

Ogilvie, Sheilagh. 2014. “The economics of guilds,” 28 The Journal of Economic Perspectives 169.

Ohana, Gil, et al. 2003. “Disclosure and Negotiation of Licensing Terms Prior to Adoption of Industry Standards: Preventing Another Patent Ambush?,” 24 European Competition Law Review 644.

Open Source Initiative. 2017. Open Standards Requirement for Software. https://opensource.org/osr.

Ostrom, Elinor. 1998. “Behavioral Approach to the Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action: Presidential Address,” 92 American Political Science Association 1.

Ostrom, Elinor, Walker, James and Gardner, Roy. 1992. “Covenants with and without a sword: Self-governance is possible,” 86 American Political Science Review 404.

Ouellette, Lisa. 2012. “Do patents disclose useful information?,” 25 Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 531.

Ovide, Shira. 2011. “Google-Motorola: It’s All About the Patents,” WSJ Blog, August 15, 2011. http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2011/08/15/google-motorola-its-all-about-the-patents/.

Owen, Bruce M., Sun, Su and Zheng, Wentong. 2005. “Antitrust in China: The Problem of Incentive Compatibility,” 2005 Journal of Competition Law and Economics 123.

PA Consulting Group. 2002. LTE Essential IPR: PA’s 3GP P-LTE Database and Report 13.

PA Consulting Group. 2006. Essential Intellectual Property in 3GPP-FDD 17.

Pai, Yogesh. 2014. “The Rational Basis for FRANDly Courts Denying Injunctive Relief for SEPs Infringement,” 19 Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 146.

Patterson, Mark R. 2002. “Inventions, Industry Standards, and Intellectual Property,” 17 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1043.

Patterson, Mark R. 2018. “Confidentiality in Patent Dispute Resolution: Antitrust Implications,” Washington Law Review (forthcoming).

Pentheroudakis, Chryssoula and Baron, Justus A.. 2017. “Licensing Terms of Standard Essential Patents: A Comprehensive Analysis of Cases,” JRC Science for Policy Report EUR 28302.

Perkins, David and Mills, Gerry, 1996. “Patent Infringement and Forum Shopping in the European Union,” 20 Fordham International Law Journal 549.

Perry, William A. 1985. “Administration of the Import Trade Laws by the United States International Trade Commission,” 3 Boston University International Law Journal 345.

Peterson, Andrea. 2016. “The Smartphone Patent War between Apple and Samsung is Headed to the Supreme Court,” Washington Post, March 21, 2016.

Petit, Nicolas. 2013. “Injunctions for Frand-Pledged Seps: The Quest for an Appropriate Test of Abuse Under Article 102 Tfeu,” 9 European Competition Journal 677.

Petit, Nicolas. 2015. “HUAWEI v ZTE: Judicial Conservatism at the Patent-Antitrust Intersection,” 10 CPI Antitrust Chronicle 3.

Petit, Nicolas. 2016a. “The IEEE-SA Revised Patent Policy and Its Definition of ‘Reasonable’ Rates: A Transatlantic Antitrust Divide?,” 27 Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal 1.

Petit, Nicolas. 2016b. “The Smallest Salable Patent-Practicing Unit (“SSPPU”) Experiment, General Purpose Technologies and the Coase Theorem,” SSRN. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2734245.

Phelps, M. and Kline, K.. 2009. Burning the Ships: Transforming Your Company’s Culture Through Intellectual Property Strategy. Wiley.

Pigou, Arthur C. 1920. The Economics of Welfare. Palgrave Macmillan.

Pohlmann, Tim, Neuhäussler, Peter and Blind, Knut 2016. “Standard Essential Patents to Boost Financial Returns,” 46 R & D Management 612.

Posner, Eric A. 1998. “Symbols, signals, and social norms in politics and the law,” 27 J. Legal Studies 765.

Posner, Richard. 2001. Antitrust Law: An Economic Perspective. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Prins, J.E.J., and, Schiessl, M.. 1993. “The New European Telecommunications Standards Institute Policy: Conflicts between Standardisation and Intellectual Property Rights,” 15 European Intellectual Property Review 263.

Qualcomm. 2015. Press Release–Qualcomm and China’s National Development and Reform Commission Reach Resolution – NDRC Accepts Qualcomm’s Rectification Plan.

Qualcomm. 2016. Press Release–Qualcomm Responds to Announcement by Korea Fair Trade Commission.

Quint, Daniel. 2014. “Pooling with Essential and Nonessential Patents,” 6 American Economic Journal 23.

Raack, David W. 1986. “A History of Injunctions in England Before 1700,” 61 Indiana Law Journal 539.

Radlow, Robert, and Weidner, Marianna Fry. 1966. “Unenforced Commitments in “Cooperative” and “Noncooperative” Non-constant-sum Games,” 10 Journal of Conflict Resolution 497.

Rato, Miguel and English, Mark. 2016. “An Assessment of Injunctions, Patents, and Standards Following the Court of Justice’s Huawei/ZTE Ruling,” 7 Journal of European Competition Law and Practice 103.

Raushenbush, Richard W. “Antisuit Injunctions and International Comity,” 71 Virginia Law Review 1039.

Régibeau, Pierre, De Coninck, Raphaël and Zenger, Hans. 2016. “Transparency, Predictability, and Efficiency of SSO-based Standardization and SEP Licensing,” A Report for the European Commission.

Reisinger, Markus and Tarantino, Emanuele. 2016. “Patent Pools in Input Markets,” CEPR Discussion Paper No. DP11512 September 2016. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2843531.

Rey, Patrick and Tirole, Jean. 2013. “Cooperation vs. Collusion: How Essentiality Shapes Co-opetition,” Toulouse School of Economics Working Paper No. TSE-439 (October 2013).

Roeller, Lars-Hendrik. 2008. “Exploitative Abuses” in Ehlermann, Claus-Dieter and Marquis, Mel, eds., European Competition Law Annual 2007: A Reformed Approach to Article 82 EC. Hart Publishing.

Rosenbrock, Karl Heinz. 2017. “Why the ETSI IPR Policy Requires Licensing to All,” www.fair-standards.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Why-the-ETSI-IPR-Policy-Requires-Licensing-to-All_Karl-Heinz-Rosenbrock_2017.pdf

Royall, M. Sean, Tessar, Amanda and Di Vincenzo, Adam. 2009. “Deterring “Patent Ambush” in Standard Setting: Lessons from Rambus and Qualcomm,” 23 Antitrust 34.

RPX Corporation. 2014. Standard Essential Patents: How Do They Fare?. www.rpxcorp.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/01/Standard-Essential-Patents-How-Do-TheyFare.pdf.

Russell, Andrew L. 2014. Open Standards and the Digital Age: History, Ideology, and Networks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rybnicek, Jan M. and Wright, Joshua D.. 2014. “Defining Section 5 of the FTC Act: The Failure of the Common Law Method and the Case for Formal Agency Guidelines,” 21 George Mason Law Review 1287.

Rysman, Marc and Simcoe, Timothy S.. 2008. “Patents and the Performance of Voluntary Standard-Setting Organizations,” 54 Management Science 11.

Salop, Steven and Morton, Fiona Scott. 2013. “Developing an Administrable MFN Enforcement Policy,” 27 Antitrust 15.

Schankerman, Mark, 1998. “How Valuable Is Patent Protection? Estimates by Technology Field,” 29 RAND Journal of Economics 77.

Schellingerhout, Ruben. 2011. “Standard setting from a competition law perspective,” Competition Policy Newsletter Nov. 2011. http://ec.europa.eu/competition/publications/cpn/2011_1_1_en.pdf.

Schmalensee, Richard. 1981. “Another look at market power in antitrust,” Working papers 1238–81, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.

Schmidt, Klaus M. 2014. “Complementary Patents and Market Structure,” 23 J. Economic & Management Strategy 68.

Schurr, Paul H. and Ozanne, Julie L.. 1985. “Influences on Exchange Processes: Buyers’ Preconceptions of a Seller’s Trustworthiness and Bargaining Toughness,” 11 Journal of Consumer Research 939.

Fiona M, Scott Morton. 2012. “Policies, Practices, and Experience of Leading Standards Organizations,” Symposium on Management of Intellectual Property in Standard-Setting Processes (October 3, 2012). Available at: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/cs/groups/pgasite/documents/webpage/pga_072703.pdf (last accessed September 6, 2016).

Scott Morton, Fiona M. and Shapiro, Carl. 2015. “Patent Assertions: Are We Any Closer to Aligning Reward to Contribution?,” National Bureau of Economic Research, No. w21678.

Seaman, Christopher B. 2010. “Reconsidering the Georgia-Pacific Standard for Reasonable Royalty Damages,” 2010 BYU Law Review 1661.

Shaknes, Alexander. 2008. “Anti-Suit and Anti-Anti-Suit Injunctions in Multi-Jurisdictional Proceedings,” 21 International Law Practicum 96.

Shapiro, Carl. 2001. “Navigating the Patent Thicket: Cross Licenses, Patent Pools, and Standard Setting,” in Jaffe, Adam B. et al., eds Innovation Policy and the Economy. Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Shapiro, Carl. 2010. “Injunctions, Hold-Up, and Patent Royalties,” 12 American Law and Economics Review 280.

Shapiro, Carl. 2015. “Patent Holdup: Myth or Reality?” (unpublished manuscript on file with authors).

Shapiro, Carl and Varian, Hal R.. 1999. “The Art of Standards Wars,” 41 California Management Review 8.

Shepsle, Kenneth A. 1991. “Discretion, Institutions, and the Problem of Government Commitment,” in Bourdrieu, Pierre and Coleman, James S., eds., Social Theory for a Changing Society. San Francisco, Oxford: Westview Press.

Shimada, Kenji, Chen, Yi-Hsuan, Kuo, Chi-Yuan, DeLaRosa, Alfredo and Miller, Jeremiah. 2007. “Patents as Property: International Injunctive Relief,” Center for Advanced Study & Research on Intellectual Property Newsletter 2007.

Shiraishi, Tadashi. 2016. “Antimonopoly Act Case Report: Imation v. One-Blue,” 1490 Jurist 7.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2009. “Patent Holdup and Oligopsonistic Collusion in Standard Setting Organizations,” 5 Journal of Competition Law and Economics 123.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2013. “The Meaning of FRAND, Part I: Royalties,” 9 J. Competition L & Economics 931.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2015a. “The Antitrust Division’s Devaluation of Standards-Essential Patents,” 104 Georgetown L. J. Online 48.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2015b. “FRAND in India: The Delhi High Court’s Emerging Jurisprudence on Royalties for Standard-Essential Patents,” 10 J. Intellectual Property L. & Practice 609.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2015c. “Mandating Final-Offer Arbitration of FRAND Royalties for Standard-Essential Patents,” 18 Stanford Tech. L. Rev. 1.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2016a. “A FRAND Contract’s Intended Third-Party Beneficiary,” 1 Criterion Journal on Innovation 1001.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2016b. “Ongoing Royalties for Patent Infringement,” 24 Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal 161.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2017a. “Fair and Unfair Discrimination in Royalties for Standard-Essential Patents Encumbered by a FRAND or RAND commitment,” 2 Criterion Journal on Innovation 301.

Sidak, J. Gregory. 2017b. “Is a FRAND Royalty a Point or a Range?,” 2 Criterion Journal on Innovation 401.

Sidak, J. Gregory and Skog, Jeremy O.. 2017. “Hedonic Prices and Patent Royalties,” 2 Criterion Journal on Innovation 601.

Siebrasse, Norman V. and Cotter, Thomas F.. 2015. “Why Switching Costs Are Irrelevant to Patent Holdup,” Comparative Patent Remedies Blog, September 24, 2015. http://comparativepatentremedies.blogspot.com/2015/09/why-switching-costs-are-irrelevant-to_24.html.

Siebrasse, Norman V. and Cotter, Thomas F.. 2016a. “A New Framework for Determining Reasonable Royalties in Patent Litigation,” 68 Florida Law Review 929.

Siebrasse, Norman V. and Cotter, Thomas F.. 2016b. “The Value of the Standard,” 101 Minnesota Law Review 1159.

Siino, Joseph. 2017. “Escaping the prisoner’s dilemma: towards a new transparency in patent licensing,” Intellectual Asset Management, July–Aug. 2017.

Simcoe, Timothy S., Graham, Stuart J.H. and Feldman, Maryann P.. 2009. “Competing on Standards? Entrepreneurship, Intellectual Property, and Platform Technologies,” 18 Journal of Economic Strategy Management 775.

Simcoe, Timothy. 2012. “Standard Setting Committees: Consensus Governance for Shared Technology Platforms,” 102 American Economic Review 305.

Singh, Nalanda. 2014. “India: Ericsson Under Probe by Competition Commission of India Over Its SEP,” LexOrbis, Mar. 27, 2014. www.mondaq.com/india/x/302770/Patent/Ericsson+Under+Probe+By+Competition+Commission+Of+India+Over+Its+SEP.

Sipro Lab. 2017. Sipro Labs Telecom. www.sipro.com.

Sirbu, Marvin and Hughes, Kent. 1986. “Standardization of local area networks,” Presented at the Fourteenth Annual Telecommunications Policy Research Conference (Airlie, Virginia) (April).

Skitol, Robert A. and Vorrasi, Kenneth M. 2009. “Patent Holdup in Standards Development: Life After Rambus v. F.T.C.,” 23 Antitrust 26.

Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. William Strahan.

Sokol, D. Daniel. 2013. “Merger Control Under China’s Anti-Monopoly Law,” 10 NYU Journal of Law and Business 1.

Sokol, D. Daniel. 2015. “Tensions Between Antitrust and Industrial Policy,” 22 George Mason Law Review 1247.

Sokol, D. Daniel. 2016. “Patent Privateering: The Rise of Hybrid Patent Assertion Entities” in Sokol, D. Daniel ed., Patent Assertion Entities and Competition Policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sokol, D. Daniel, Crane, Daniel and Ezrachi, Ariel. 2015. Global Antitrust Compliance Handbook. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sokol, D. Daniel and Zheng, Wentong, 2013. “FRAND in China,” 22 Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal 71.

Swann, G.M.P. 2010. “International Standards and Trade: A Review of the Empirical Literature,” OECD Trade Policy Working Papers, No. 97, OECD Publishing.

Swanson, Daniel G. and Baumol, William J.. 2005. “Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory (RAND) Royalties, Standards Selection, and Control of Market Power,” 73 Antitrust Law Journal 1.

Tadelis, Steven and Williamson, Oliver E., 2012. “Transaction Cost Economics,” in, Gibbons, Robert and Roberts, John, eds., The Handbook of Organizational Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Tan, Daniel. 2005. “Anti-Suit Injunctions and the Vexing Problem of Comity,” 45 Virginia Journal of International Law 283.

Tassey, Gregory. 2000. “Standardisation of Technology-Based Markets,” 29 Research Policy 587.

Taylor, David O. 2014. “Using Reasonable Royalties to Value Patented Technology,” 49 Georgia Law Review 79.

Teece, David J. and Sherry, Edward F. 2003. “Standards Setting and Antitrust,” 87 Minnesota Law Review 1913.

Teece, David J. and Sherry, Edward F. 2016. “On the ‘Smallest Saleable Patent Practicing Unit’ Doctrine: An Economi and Public Policy Analysis.” Tushner Center for the Management of Intellectual Property – Working Paper Series No. 11.

Teitz, Louise Ellen. 2004. “Both Sides of the Coin: A Decade of Parallel Proceedings and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in Transnational Litigation,” 10 Roger Williams University Law Review 1.

Tirole, Jean and Lerner, Josh 2015. “Standard Essential Patents,” 123 Journal of Political Economy 547.

Trevett, Neil. 2015. “Khronos Intellectual Property Framework Briefing,” Khronos Group. www.khronos.org/members/ip-framework.

Tsai, Joanna and Wright, Joshua D.. 2015. “Standard Setting, Intellectual Property Rights, and the Role of Antitrust in Regulating Incomplete Contracts,” 80 Antitrust Law Journal 157.

Tsilas, Nicos L. 2005. “The Threat to Innovation, Interoperability, and Government Procurement Options from Recently Proposed Definitions of ‘Open Standards,’” 10 International Journal of Communication Law and Policy 8.

U.S. Chamber of Commerce. 2014. Competing Interests in China’s. Competition Law Enforcement: China’s Anti-Monopoly Law Application and the Role of Industrial Policy. www.uschamber.com/report/competing-interests-chinas-competition-law-enforcement-chinas-anti-monopoly-law-application.

Updegrove, Andrew. 2006. “Ex Ante Disclosure: Risks, Rewards, Process and Alternatives,” 5 Consortium Standards Bulletin 4.

Varian, Hal R. and Shapiro, Carl 1998. Information Rules: A Strategic Guide to the Network Economy. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Veitch, John M. 1986. “Repudiations and Confiscations by the Medieval State,” 46 The Journal of Economic History 31.

Véron, Pierre and Romet, Isabelle. 2011. “On the Way to French Balance, the French Approach for Patent Litigation,” Who’s Who Legal, May 2011. http://whoswholegal.com/news/features/article/28961.

Vestager, Margarethe. 2015. “Intellectual Property and Competition,” International Bar Association, 19th Annual Conference, Florence, Italy.

Vesterdorf, Bo. 2013. “IP Rights and Competition Law Enforcement Questions,” 4 Journal of European Competition Law and Practice 109.

Viswanath, Raghavi. 2016. “Demystifying the Indian FRAND Regime: The Interplay of Competition and Intellectual Property,” 21 Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 89.

Vringo 2017. About Us. http://corporate.vringo.com/company.html.

Wang, Ping. 2010. “On Standardization in China,” Talkstandards. Aug. 16, 2010. www.talkstandards.com/on-standardization-in-china/.

Wang, Xianlin. 2013. “The Application of the Anti-Monopoly Law in the context of Intellectual Property Rights,” in Emch, Adrian, Stallibrass, David eds. China’s Anti-Monopoly Law–The First Five Years. Wolters Kluwer.

Watrous. 2011. Letter from Bruce H. Watrous, Jr., Vice President and Chief IP Counsel, Intellectual Property and Licensing, Apple, Inc. to Luis Jorge Romero Saro, ETSI Director-General (November 11, 2011).

Wayland, Joseph F. 2012. Statement before Oversight of the Impact on Competition of Exclusion Orders to Enforce Standard-Essential Patents: Hearing Before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 112th Cong., 2d Sess., July 11, 2012.

Weber, Joseph H. 2008. “The Bell System Divestiture: Background, Implementation, and Outcome,” 61 Federal Communications Law Journal 21.

Werbach, Kevin. 2009. “Higher Standards Regulation in the Network Age,” 23 Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 179.

West, Joel and Gallagher, Scott. 2006. “Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firm investment in open-source software,” 36 R&D Management 319.

Whitehead, Alfred North. 1911. An Introduction to Mathematics. Watchmaker Publishing.

Willard, K. Tom. 2001. “The 1975 Xerox Consent Decree: Ancient Artifacts and Current Tensions,” 68 Antitrust Law Journal 967.

Williamson, Oliver E. 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York: The Free Press.

Wikipedia. 2017. “Open Standard,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard (last accessed April 3, 2017).

Winn, Jane. 2006. “Standard Developing Organizations as a Form of Self-Regulation,” in Bolin, Sherrie, ed., The Standards Edge: Standardization: Unifier or Divider?. Bolin Group.

Wong-Ervin, Koren W. 2014, China’s Antitrust Enforcement in 2014: Looking Back, Looking Forward.

Woodcock, Rams A. 2017. “Price Discrimination as a Violation of the Sherman Act” (working paper, May 22, 2017. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2972369).

World Intellectual Prop. Org. (WIPO). 2009a. WIPO Arbitration Rules, WIPO Publication No. 446.

World Intellectual Prop. Org. (WIPO). 2009b. WIPO Standing Committee Report on the Law of Patents on “Standards and Patent,” March 23–27, 2009 SCP/13/2.

World Intellectual Prop. Org. (WIPO). 2011. WIPO Overview 2011.

World Intellectual Prop. Org. (WIPO). 2017. UDRP Domain Name Decisions (gTLD), World Intellectual Property Organization.

World Trade Organization. 2011. Technical Barriers to Trade, Decisions and Recommendations, adopted by the WTO Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade Since 1 January 1995, Geneva. www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/tbttotrade_e.pdf.

Wright. 2014. “Does the FTC Have a New IP Agenda?,” Remarks at the 2014 Milton Handler Lecture: Antitrust in the 21st Century (March 11, 2014). www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/public_statements/288861/140311ipagenda.pdf.

Yale Law Journal. 1946. “Compulsory Patent Licensing by Antitrust Decree,” 56 Yale Law Journal 77.

Yeung, Natalie. 2015. “IP and competition law – The Chinese perspective,” 3 Journal of Antitrust Enforcement 172.

Yi, Sang-Seung and Kim, Yoonhee, 2017. “Patent Pledges: Korean Perspectives,” in Contreras, Jorge L., ed., Patent Pledges – Global Perspectives on Patent Law’s Private Ordering Frontier. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Yoon, Mi-Kyung. 2006. “Qualcomm Royalties Exceed 3 Billion Won,” MoneyToday, May 9, 2006. http://stock.mt.co.kr/view/mtview.php?no=2006050911220823348.

Zhan, Ying. 2014. “Problems of Enforcement of Patent Law in China and Its Ongoing Fourth Amendment,” 19 Journal of Intellectual Property Rights 266.

Zheng, Wentong. 2013. “Transplanting Antitrust in China: Economic Transition, Market Structure, and State Control,” 32 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law 643.

ZTE. 2017. About ZTE. wwwen.zte.com.cn/en/about.

[1] A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co., 960 F.2d 1020 (Fed. Cir. 1992) (en banc).

[2] Abbott Labs. v. Sandoz, Inc., 500 F. Supp. 2d 846 (N.D. Ill. 2007).

[3] Abbott Labs. v. Sandoz, Inc., 533 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[4] ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Commc’ns., Inc., 694 F.3d 1312 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[5] Acumed LLC v. Stryker Corp., 551 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[6] Addamax Corp. v. Open Software Found., Inc., 888 F. Supp. 274 (D. Mass. 1995).

[7] Allied Tube & Conduit Corp. v. Indian Head, Inc., 486 U.S. 492 (1988).

[8] Am. Inst. of Intradermal Cosmetics, Inc. v. Soc’y of Permanent Cosmetic Prof’ls, CV 12–06887 GAF (JCGx), 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58138 (C.D. Cal. Apr. 16, 2013).

[9] Am. Soc’y of Sanitation Eng’ing, No. C-3169, 106 F.T.C. 324, 324 ¶ 2 (1985).

[10] Amado v. Microsoft Corp., 517 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[11] American Soc’y of Mechanical Engineers v. Hydrolevel Corp., 456 U.S. 556 (1982).

[12] Amoco Prod. Co. v. Gambell, 480 U.S. 531 (1987).

[13] Apple Inc. v. Acacia Research, et al. (N.D. Cal., case number 5:16-cv-07266, filed December 20, 2016).

[14] Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 757 F.3d 1286 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

[15] Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 678 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[16] Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 695 F.3d 1370 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[17] Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 735 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

[18] Apple Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., 809 F.3d 633 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

[19] Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72745 (W.D. Wis. 2011).

[20] Apple, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility, Inc., 886 F. Supp. 2d 1061 (W.D. Wis. 2012).

[21] Apple, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 869 F. Supp. 2d 901 (N.D. Ill. 2012).

[22] Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd., No. 11-cv-01846, 2012 WL 1672493 (N.D. Cal. May 14, 2012).

[23] Atari Games Corp. v. Nintendo of Am., Inc., 897 F.2d 1572 (Fed. Cir. 1990).

[24] Automated Merchandising System, Inc. v. Crane Co., 357 F. App’x 297 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

[25] Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. v. W.L. Gore & Assocs., Inc., 670 F.3d 1171 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[26] Basic, Inc. v. Levinson, 485 U.S. 224 (1988).

[27] Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. Technical Dev. Corp., 433 F.2d 55 (7th Cir. 1970).

[28] Breaux Bros. Farms, Inc. v. Teche Sugar Co., 21 F.3d 83 (5th Cir. 1994).

[29] Broad. Music, Inc. v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc., 441 U.S. 1 (1979).

[30] Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., 501 F.3d 297 (3d Cir. 2007).

[31] Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., 543 F.3d 683 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[32] Broadcom Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 05-3350 (MLC), 2006 WL 2528525 (D.N.J. Aug. 31, 2006).

[33] Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 (1962).

[34] Brunswick Corp. v. Pueblo Bowl–O–Mat, Inc., 429 U.S. 477 (1977).

[35] C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Sys., Inc., 157 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

[36] Cal. Dental Ass’n v. FTC, 536 U.S. 780,781 (1999).

[37] Cal. Motor Transp. Co. v. Trucking Unlimited, 404 U.S. 508 (1972).

[38] Cascades Comput. Innovation LLC v. RPX Corp., No. 12-cv-01143-YGR, 2016 WL 705982 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 23, 2016).

[39] Cascades Comput. Innovation LLC v. RPX Corp., No. 12–CV–1143 YGR, 2013 WL 6247594 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 3, 2013).

[40] Catalano, Inc. v. Target Sales, Inc., 446 U.S. 643, 647 (1980).

[41] CBS v. ASCAP, 620 F.2d 930 (2d Cir. 1980).

[42] In re Certain Alkaline Batteries, Inv. No. 337-TA-165, USITC Pub. No. 1616 (Nov. 1984) (Final), aff’d, Duracell Inc. v. U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 778 F.2d 1578 (Fed. Cir. 1985).

[43] In re Certain Baseband Processor Chips & Chipsets, Transmitter & Receiver (Radio) Chips, Power Control, 337-TA-543 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).

[44] In re Certain Dynamic Random Access Memories, Inv. No. 337-TA-242 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n Nov. 1987).

[45] In re Certain Elec. Devices, Including Wireless Commc’n Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing Devices, and Tablet Computs., No. 337-TA-794, 2013 WL 2453722 (Int’l Trade Comm’n June 4, 2013).

[46] In re Certain Molded-In Sandwich Panel Inserts and Methods for their Installation, Inv. No. 337-TA-99 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n May 1982).

[47] In re Certain Optoelectronic Devices for Fiber Optic Communications, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-860 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n May 9, 2014).

[48] In re Certain Recordable Compact Discs & Rewritable Compact Discs, 2004 ITC LEXIS 990, Inv. No. 337-TA-474 (Int’l Trade Comm’n Mar. 25, 2004).

[49] In re Certain Welded Stainless Steel Pipe and Tube, Inv. No. 337-TA-29 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n Feb. 22, 1978).

[50] In re Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-868 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n June 13, 2014).

[51] In re Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337- TA-800 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).

[52] In re Certain Wireless Standard Compliant Electronic Devices, Including Communication Devices and Tablet Computers Inv. No. 337-TA-953 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).

[53] China Trade and Dev. Corp v. M. V. Choong Yong, 837 F.2d 33 (2d Cir. 1987).

[54] In re Chips & Prods. Containing Same, Including Cellular Tel. Handsets, Inv. No. 337-TA-543 (U.S. Int’l Trade Comm’n).

[55] ChriMar Sys., Inc v. Cisco Sys., Inc, 72 F. Supp. 3d 1012 (N.D. Cal. 2014).

[56] In re Circuit Breaker Litig., 984 F. Supp. 1267 (C.D. Cal. 1997).

[57] Clamp-All Corp. v. Cast Iron Soil Pipe Inst., 851 F.2d 478 (1st Cir. 1988).

[58] Cole v. Cunningham, 133 U.S. 107 (1890).

[59] Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc. v. Am. Soc. of Composers, 400 F. Supp. 737 (S.D.N.Y. 1975).

[60] Commercial Credit Corp. v. Nelson Motors, Inc., 147 S.E.2d 481 (S.C. 1966).

[61] Commercial Data Servers, Inc. v. IBM Corp., 262 F. Supp. 2d 50 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).

[62] Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Org. v. Buffalo Tech., Inc., 492 F. Supp. 2d 600 (E.D. Tex. 2007).

[63] Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Org. v. Cisco Sys., Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 809 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

[64] Commonwealth Sci. & Indus. Research Org. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 6:11-cv-00343, 2014 WL 3805817 (E.D. Tex. July 23, 2014).

[65] Consol. Metal Prods., Inc. v. Am. Petroleum Inst., 846 F.2d 284 (5th Cir. 1988).

[66] Continental T.V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 U.S. 36 (1977).

[67] Craftsmen Limousine, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., 491 F.3d 380 (8th Cir. 2007).

[68] Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharm., Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993)

[69] Delaware Coal. for Open Gov’t, Inc. v. Strine, 733 F.3d 510 (3d Cir. 2013).

[70] In re Dell Computer Corp., 121 F.T.C. 616, 617 (1996).

[71] DeLorme Publishing Co., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Com’n, 805 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 12, 2015).

[72] Dig. Equip. Corp. v. Uniq Dig. Techs., Inc., 73 F.3d 756 (7th Cir. 1996).

[73] Douglas Dynamics, LLC v. Buyers Prods. Co., 717 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

[74] Duplan Corp. v. Deering Milliken, Inc., 444 F. Supp 648 (D.S.C. 1977).

[75] E. & J. Gallo Winery v. Andina Licores S.A., 446 F.3d 984 (9th Cir. 2006).

[76] E. Bement & Sons v. Nat’l Harrow Co., 186 U.S. 70 (1902).

[77] E.R.R. Pres. Conf. v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 (1961).

[78] Eastern R.R. Presidents Conference v. Noerr Motor Freight, Inc., 365 U.S. 127 (1961).

[79] eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. (U.S. 2006).

[80] Edwards Lifesciences AG. v. Corevalve, Inc., 699 F.3d 1305 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[81] Ericsson Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc., No. 6:10-cv-00473, 2013 WL 4046225 (E.D. Tex. Aug. 6, 2013).

[82] Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Sys., Inc., 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

[83] ESS Tech., Inc. v. PC-Tel., Inc., No. C-99-20292 RMW, 1999 WL 33520483, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 4, 1999).

[84] Ethyl Gasoline Corp. v. United States, 309 U.S. 436 (1940).

[85] Found. for Interior Design Educ. Research v. Savannah Coll. of Art & Design, 244 F.3d 521, 530–31 (6th Cir. 2001).

[86] FTC v. Actavis, Inc. 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013).

[87] FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 5:17-cv-00220 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 17, 2017).

[88] FTC v. Qualcomm Inc., No. 5:17- cv- 00220-LHK (N.D. Cal. June 26, 2017).

[89] FTC v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co., 405 U.S. 233, 245 (1972).

[90] FTC. v. Indiana Fed’n of Dentists, 476 U.S. 447 (1986).

[91] Fujitsu Ltd. v. Netgear Inc., 620 F.3d 1321 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

[92] Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc. et vs. Tellabs, Inc. et al. (N.D. Ill. 2012).

[93] Gage v. Riverside Trust Co., 86 F. 984, 986 (C.C.S.D. Cal. 1898).

[94] Garretson v. Clark, 111 U.S. 120 (1884).

[95] Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. U.S. Plywood-Champion Papers Inc., 446 F.2d 295 (2d Cir. 1971).

[96] Georgia–Pacific Corp. v. U.S. Plywood Corp., 318 F. Supp. 1116 (S.D.N.Y. 1970).

[97] In re Geuns, 946 F.2d 845 (Fed. Cir. 1991).

[98] Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 5:12–cv–04882–PSG, 2014 WL 2194501 (N.D. Cal. 2014).

[99] Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 547 F.3d 266 (5th Cir. 2008).

[100] Golden Bridge Tech., Inc. v. Nokia, Inc., 416 F. Supp. 2d 525 (E.D. Tex. 2006).

[101] Goss Int’l Corp. v. Man Roland Druckmaschinen Aktiengesellschaft, 491 F.3d 355 (8th Cir. 2007).

[102] GPNE Corp. v. Apple, Inc., No.: 12–CV–02885–LHK, 2014 WL 1494247 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 16, 2014).

[103] Grain Processing Corp. v. Am. Maize-Prods. Co., 185 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 1999).

[104] GSI Technology Inc. v. Cypress Semiconductor Corp. (N.D. Cal. 2015).

[105] Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386, 397–98 (1945–a).

[106] Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386, 397–98 (1945–a).

[107] Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 324 U.S. 570, 573 (1945–b).

[108] Hilton v. Guyot, 159 U.S. 113 (1895).

[109] Hush-A-Phone Corp. v. United States, 238 F.2d 266 (D.C. Cir. 1956).

[110] Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 609 F. Supp. 2d 951 (N.D. Cal. 2009).

[111] Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., 645 F.3d 1336, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

[112] Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 527 F. Supp. 2d 1084 (N.D. Cal. 2007).

[113] i4i Ltd. P’ship v. Microsoft Corp., 598 F.3d 831 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

[114] Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Indep. Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28 (2006).

[115] Image Technical Servs., Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 125 F.3d 1195 (9th Cir. 1997).

[116] Impression Prods., Inc. v. Lexmark Int’l, Inc., 581 U.S. __ (2017),

[117] Indep. Serv. Orgs. Antitrust Litig. v. Xerox Corp., 203 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2000).

[118] In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC Patent Litig., No. 11 C 9308, 2013 WL 5593609, at *11 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 3, 2013–a).

[119] In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC Patent Litigation, 956 F. Supp. 2d 925 (N.D. Ill. 2013–b).

[120] Intel Corp., FTC Dkt. No. 9288 (June 8, 1998).

[121] Intergraph Corp. v. Intel Corp., 195 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 1999).

[122] Iwncomm v. Sony (2015) Jing Zhi Min Chu Zi No. 1194 (Beijing IP Court)

[123] Jac USA, Inc. v. Precision Coated Prods., Inc., No. 00-3780, 2003 WL 1627043, at *12 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 25, 2003).

[124] Jessup v. Am. Kennel Club Inc., 61 F. Supp. 2d 5, 12 (S.D.N.Y. 1999).

[125] Kimble v. Marvel Entm’t, LLC, 135 S. Ct. 2401 (2015).

[126] Kobe, Inc. v. Dempsey Pump Co., 198 F.2d 416 (10th Cir. 1952).

[127] In re Kodak, Case No. 12-10202 (ALG) (Bankr Ct Del 2012).

[128] Kyocera v. Int’l Trade Com’n, 545 F.3d 1340, 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[129] LaserDynamics, Inc. v. Quanta Computer, Inc., 694 F.3d 51 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[130] Lotes Co. v. Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., No. 12-cv-7465-SAS (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 6, 2013).

[131] Lucent Techs., Inc. v. Gateway, Inc., 580 F.3d 1301 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

[132] Maric v. St. Agnes Hosp. Corp., 65 F.3d 310, 313 (2d Cir. 1995).

[133] Martin v. Am. Kennel Club Inc., 697 F. Supp. 997, 999 n.4 (N.D. Ill. 1988).

[134] Mason City Tent & Awning Co. v. Clapper, 144 F. Supp. 754 (W.D. Mo. 1956).

[135] MercExchange, L.L.C. v. eBay, Inc., 401 F. 3d 1323, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

[136] Merial Ltd. v. Cipla Ltd., 681 F.3d 1283 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[137] Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 696 F.3d 872 (9th Cir. 2012).

[138] Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 795 F.3d 1024 (9th Cir. 2015).

[139] Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 854 F. Supp. 2d 993, 999 (W.D. Wash. 2012).

[140] Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 871 F. Supp. 2d 1089 (W.D. Wash. 2012).

[141] Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 963 F. Supp. 2d 1176 (W.D. Wash. 2013).

[142] Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola, Inc., 2:10-cv-01823, 2013 WL 2111217 (W.D. Wash. 2013).

[143] Microsoft Mobile, Inc. v. Interdigital, Inc., 1:15-cv-00723-RGA (D. Del. Apr. 13, 2016).

[144] Microsoft Mobile, Inc. v. Interdigital, Inc., 1:15- cv- 00723- RGA (D. Del. May 16, 2017).

[145] Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Serv. Corp., 465 U.S. 752, 768 (1984).

[146] Morton Salt Co. v. Suppiger Co., 314 U.S. 488 (1942).

[147] Motion Picture Pat. Co. v. Universal Film Mfg. Co., 243 U.S. 502, 510 (1917).

[148] Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 1:10-cv-6385 (E.D. Ill. Oct. 6, 2010).

[149] Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 1:10-cv-24063 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 10, 2010).

[150] Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 10-cv-699 (W.D. Wis. Nov. 10, 2010).

[151] In re Motorola Mobility, LLC & Google, Inc., No. 1210120 (F.T.C. 2013).

[152] Multimedia Patent Trust v. Apple Inc., No. 10-CV-2618-H (KSC) (S.D. Cal. Nov. 20, 2012).

[153] N. Pac. Ry. Co. v. United States, 356 U.S. 1, 5 (1958).

[154] Nat’l Harrow Co. v. E. Bement & Sons, 47 N.Y.S. 462, 468 (App. Div. 1897).

[155] NCAA v. Bd. of Regents, 468 U.S. 85, 109 n.38 (1984).

[156] In re Negotiated Data Sol. LLC (N-Data), No. 051-0094 (F.T.C. Jan. 2008).

[157] Nero AG v. MPEG LA, L.L.C., No. 10-Cv-3672-MRP-RZ (C.D. Cal. Sept. 14, 2010).

[158] Ninestar Technology Co., Ltd. v. Int’l Trade Com’n, 667 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 8, 2012).

[159] Nokia Corp. and Nokia Inc. v. Interdigital Communications Corp. and Interdigital Technology Corp., Civil Action No. 05-16-JJF (D. Del. Feb. 9, 2007).

[160] In re Nortel Networks Inc, Case No. 09-10138 (KG) (Bankr Ct Del 2011).

[161] In re Novon Int’l, Inc., No. 96-BK-15463B, 2000 WL 432848, at *5 (W.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2000).

[162] NYNEX Corp. v. Discon, Inc., 525 U.S. 128, 133 (1998).

[163] One-Blue LLC v. Imation Corp., No. 1:13-cv-00917-UNA U.S. Dist. (D. Del May 22, 2013).

[164] Openwave Sys., Inc. v. 724 Solutions (US) Inc, No. 3:09-CV-03511-CRB. (N.D.Cal. Nov. 12, 2009).

[165] Openwave Sys., Inc. v. 724 Solutions (US) Inc., No. C 09-3511 RS (N.D. Cal. 2010).

[166] Orken Exterminating Co. v. FTC, 894 F.2d 1354, 1364 (11th Cir. 1988).

[167] Orr v. Bank of Am., 285 F.3d 764, 782 (9th Cir. 2002).

[168] Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Torrent Pharm. Ltd., 99 F. Supp. 3d. 461 (D.N.J. 2015).

[169] Paddock Publ’ns, Inc. v. Chi. Tribune Co., 103 F.3d 42, 47 (7th Cir. 1996).

[170] Palmer v. BRG of Ga., Inc., 498 U.S. 46, 49 (1990) (per curiam).

[171] Petersen v. Fee Int’l, Ltd.,381 F. Supp. 1071 (W.D. Okla. 1974).

[172] Presidio Components, Inc. v. Am. Tech. Ceramics Corp., 702 F.3d 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

[173] Princess Lida of Thurn & Taxis v. Thompson, 305 U.S. 456 (1939).

[174] Princo Corp. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 563 F.2d 1301, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

[175] Princo Corp. v.Int’l Trade Comm’n, 616 F.3d 1318, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

[176] Prism Techs. LLC v. Sprint Spectrum L.P., 849 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2017)

[177] In re Proxim, Case No. 05-11639 (pJW) (Bankr. Ct Del 2005).

[178] In re Qimonda, 737 F.3d 14 (4th Cir. 2013).

[179] Quaak v. Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler Bedrijfsrevisoren, 361 F.3d 11 (1st Cir. 2004).

[180] Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., 539 F. Supp. 2d 1214 (S.D. Cal. 2007).

[181] Qualcomm Inc. v. Broadcom Corp., 548 F.3d 1004 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[182] Qualcomm v. Broadcom, 501 F.3d 297 (3rd Cir. 2007).

[183] Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Elecs., Inc., 553 U.S. 617 (2008).

[184] Radiant Burners, Inc. v. Peoples Gas Light & Coke Co., 364 U.S. 656, 656 (1961)

[185] Radio Sys. Corp. v. Lalor, 709 F.3d 1124 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

[186] Rambus Inc. v. FTC, 522 F.3d 456, 459 (D.C. Cir. 2008).

[187] Rambus Inc. v. Infineon Techs. Ag, 318 F.3d 1081 (Fed. Cir. 2003).

[188] In re Rambus, Inc., Dkt. No. 9302 (F.T.C. 2006).

[189] Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. LSI Corp., 946 F. Supp. 2d 998 (N.D. Cal. 2013).

[190] Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. LSI Corp., C–12–03451 RMW, 2014 WL 46997 (N.D.Cal. Jan. 6, 2014).

[191] Realtek Semiconductor, Corp. v. LSI Corp., No. C–12–3451–RMW, 2014 WL 2738216 (N.D. Cal. June 16, 2014).

[192] Rembrandt Tech. LP. V. Harris Corp., 2008 Del. Super. LEXIS 400 (Del. Super. 2008).

[193] Rembrandt Techs., L.P. v. Harris Corp., No. 07C-09-059-JRS, 2009 Del. Super. LEXIS 298, at *1 (Super. Ct. Aug. 14, 2009).

[194] Research in Motion Limited v. Motorola, Inc., 644 F. Supp. 2d 788, 795–96 (N.D. Tex. 2008).

[195] Research in Motion v. Motorola, Inc., 644 F.Supp.2d 788 (N.D. Tex. 2008).

[196] Riles v. Shell Exploration & Production Co., 298 F.3d 1302 (Fed. Cir. 2002).

[197] In re Robert Bosch GmbH, No. 121-0081 (F.T.C. 2013).

[198] Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Mfg. Corp., 659 F.3d 1142 (Fed. Cir. 2011).

[199] Rudenberg v. Clark, 72 F. Supp. 381 (D. Mass. 1947).

[200] Rudenberg v. Clark, 81 F. Supp. 42 (D. Mass. 1948).

[201] Samsung Elecs. Co., Ltd. v. Apple Korea Ltd., Case no. 2011 GaHap 39552 (Aug. 24, 2012)

[202] SCM Corp. v. Xerox Corp., 645 F.2d 1195 (2d Cir. 1981).

[203] Scott Paper Co. v. Marcalus Co., 326 U.S. 249, 256 (1945).

[204] SD3, LLC v. Black & Decker (U.S.) Inc., 801 F.3d 412 (4th Cir. 2015).

[205] Seattle Totems Hockey Club, Inc. v. Nat’l Hockey League, 652 F.2d 852 (9th Cir. 1981).

[206] Seidenberg v. Summit Bank, 791 A.2d 1068 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2002).

[207] Sessions Tank Liners, Inc. v. Joor Mfg., Inc., 17 F.3d 295, 299 (9th Cir. 1994).

[208] Sony Elecs., Inc. v. Soundview Techs., Inc. (D. Conn 2001, p.185).

[209] Spansion, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 629 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2010).

[210] Spectrum Sports, Inc. v. McQuillan, 506 U.S. 447 (1993).

[211] Spindelfabrik Suessen-Schurr Stahlecker & Grill v. Schubert & Salzer Maschinenfabrik AG, 829 F.2d 1075 (Fed. Cir. 1987).

[212] Stambler v. Diebold, Inc., No. 85 CV 3014 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 1988).

[213] Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) v. United States, 33 F. 2d 617 (D.C. Ill. 1929).

[214] Standard Oil Company v. United States, 283 U.S. 163 (1931).

[215] Standard Sanitary Manufacturing v. United States, 226 U.S. 20 (1912).

[216] In re Summit Technology, Inc., Dkt. No. 9286 (Fed. Trade Comm’n).

[217] TCL Commc’n Tech. Holdings, Ltd. v. Telefonaktienbolaget LM Ericsson et al. (C.D. Cal. 2015).

[218] Tewari De-Ox Systems, Inc. v. Mountain States/Rosen, L.L.C., 637 F.3d 604 (5th Cir. 2011).

[219] Thompson v. Metropolitan Multi-List, Inc., 934 F.2d 1566 (11th Cir. 2011).

[220] Toys “R” Us, Inc. v. FTC, 221 F.3d 928, 937 (7th Cir. 2000).

[221] TruePosition, Inc. v. LM Ericsson Tel. Co., 977 F. Supp. 2d 462, 470 (E.D. Pa. 2013).

[222] TruePosition, Inc. v. LM Ericsson Telephone Co., 899 F. Supp. 3d 356 (E.D. Pa. 2012).

[223] Unwired Planet International Ltd v Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd & Anor [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat. Ct.) (Eng.)

[224] U.S. Gypsum Co. v. Nat’l Gypsum Co., 352 U.S. 457, 465 (1957).

[225] U.S. Philips Corp. v. ITC, 424 F.3d 1179, 1188 (Fed. Cir. 2005).

[226] In re Union Oil Co. of Cal., 140 F.T.C. 123 (2003).

[227] In re Matter of Union Oil Co. of Cal., 138 F.T.C. 1 (2004).

[228] United Mine Workers of Am. v. Pennington, 381 U.S. 657 (1965).

[229] United States v. Aluminum Co. of America (Alcoa), 1940–1943 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,200, 1942 WL 82576 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 15, 1942).

[230] United States v. American Bosch Corp., 1940–1943 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,253, 1942 WL 82620 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 29, 1942).

[231] United States v. ASCAP, 1940–43 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,104 (S.D.N.Y. 1941).

[232] United States v. Associated Patents, 134 F. Supp. 74 (E.D. Mich. 1955), aff’d, 350 U.S. 960 (1956).

[233] United States v. AT&T Co., 552 F. Supp. 131, 135–38 (D.D.C. 1982).

[234] United States v. Automobile Mfrs. Ass’n, 307 F. Supp. 617 (C.D. Cal. 1969).

[235] United States v. Besser Mfg. Co., 96 F. Supp. 304 (E.D. Mich. 1951).

[236] United States v. BMI, 1966 Trade Cas.(CCH) ¶ 71,941 (S.D.N.Y. 1966).

[237] United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 115 F. Supp. 835, 842 (D.N.J. 1953).

[238] United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 15 F.2d 715 (N.D. Ohio 1925).

[239] United States v. Gen. Elec. Co., 82 F. Supp. 753 (D.N.J. 1949).

[240] United States v. Grinnell Corp., 384 U.S. 563 (1966).

[241] United States v. Hartford-Empire Co., 46 F. Supp. 541 (N.D. Ohio 1942).

[242] United States v. Holophane Co., 119 F. Supp. 114 (S.D. Ohio 1954).

[243] United States v. Krasnov, 143 F. Supp. 184, 189 (E.D. Pa. 1956).

[244] United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. 98–1232 (D.D.C. Nov. 12, 2002).

[245] United States v. Microsoft, Corp., 253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001).

[246] United States v. Nat’l Lead Co., 332 U.S. 319 (1947).

[247] United States v. Nat’l Lead Co., 63 F. Supp. 513 (S.D.N.Y. 1945).

[248] United States v. New Wrinkle, Inc., 342 U.S. 371 (1952).

[249] United States v. Singer Mfg. Co., 374 U.S. 174 (1963).

[250] United States v. Standard Oil Co. (New Jersey), 1940–1943 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 56,198, 1942 WL 82574 (D.N.J. Mar. 25, 1942).

[251] United States v. Studiengesellschaft Kohle, m.b.H., 670 F.2d 1122, 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1981).

[252] United States v. Terminal R.R. Ass’n of St. Louis, 224 U.S. 383 (1912).

[253] United States v. Textile Mach. Works, Civil No. 43–671., 1950 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1909, at *8 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 9, 1950).

[254] United States v. Topco Assocs., Inc., 405 U.S. 596, 608 (1972).

[255] United States v. Trenton Potteries Co., 273 U.S. 392, 400–01 (1927).

[256] United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364 (1948).

[257] United States v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 67 F. Supp. 397, 407 (D.D.C 1946).

[258] United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 1951 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1917, 1951 Trade Cas. (CCH) P62,853 (D.D.C. May 15, 1951).

[259] United States v. Visa U.S.A., Inc., 344 F.3d 229, 239 (2d Cir. 2003).

[260] United States v. Western Elec. Co., 1956 Trade Cas. (CCH) ¶ 68,246, at 71,138 (D.N.J.1956).

[261] United States v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 648 F.2d 642, 647 (9th Cir. 1981).

[262] In re Use of Carterfone Device (F.C.C. 1968).

[263] Verizon Commc’ns Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. 398 (2004).

[264] Virnetx, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., 767 F.3d 1308 (Fed. Cir. 2014).

[265] Voda v. Cordis Corp., 536 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2008).

[266] Vringo, Inc. v. ZTE Corp., No. 14-CV-4988 LAK, 2015 WL 3498634 (S.D.N.Y. June 3, 2015).

[267] W.W. Montague & Co. v. Lowry, 193 U.S. 38, 47–48 (1904).

[268] Wang Labs., Inc. v. Mitsubishi Elecs. Am., Inc., 103 F.3d 1571 (Fed. Cir. 1997).

[269] Weinberger v. Romero-Barcelo, 456 U.S. 305 (1982).

[270] Willemijn Houdstermaatschappij BV v. Standard Microsystems Corp., 925 F. Supp. 193 (S.D.N.Y. 1996).

[271] Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015).

[272] Windsurfing Int’l, Inc. v. AMF, Inc., 782 F.2d 995 (Fed. Cir. 1986).

[273] Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 136 (1969).

[274] Zoran Corp. v. DTS, Inc., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6675 (N.D. Cal. 2009).

[275] 最高人民法院关于朝阳兴诺公司按照建设部颁发的行业标准《复合载体夯扩桩设计规程》设计、施工而实施标准中专利的行为是否构成侵犯专利权问题的函 ([2008]民三他字第4号) [Supreme People’s Court’s Letter of Reply on Whether Chaoyang Xingnuo Co. Infringed on a Patent Included in a Ministry of Construction Standard When it Implemented the Patent as Required by the Standard] (July 8, 2008).

[276] 衡水子牙河建筑工程有限公司与张晶廷等侵犯发明专利权纠纷上诉案 [Civil Judgment on Appeal of Dispute Between Hengshui Ziyahe Construction Ltd. Co. and Zhang Jingting et al. Regarding Invention Patent Infringement], Hebei High People’s Court (March 21, 2011).

[277] Huawei Technology Co., Ltd. v InterDigital Communications, Inc., Shenzhen Intermediate Ct. IP Civ. First Instance No. 857, aff’d (2013) Guangdong High Ct. Civ. Third instance No. 305.

[278] Microsoft/ Nokia, Case No COMP/M.7047, Commission decision of 4 December 2013.

[279] Office for Publications of the European Union, Case No. Comp/M.6381, Google/Motorola Mobility, European Commission decision ¶¶ 107 et seq. (February 13, 2012).

[280] European Comm’n, Sun/ETSI (Case 37926).

[281] United Brands, CJEU, 14 February 1978, Case 27/76, [1978] ECR 207.

[282] Hilti v Commission, General Court, 2 March 1994 T-30/89, [1991] ECR II-1439.

[283] Peterbroeck, CJEU, 14 December 1995, C-312/93, [1995] ECR I-4599.

[284] Tetra Pak v. Commission, General Court, 14 November 1996, Case C-333/94 P, [1996] ECR I-5951.

[285] Microsoft, General Court, 17 September 2007, Case T-201/04, [2004] ECR II-3601.

[286] European Comm’n Decision COMP/38.636- Rambus of 9 Dec. 2009, art. 101, 102, 2010 O.J. (C 30).

[287] Deutsche Telekom, CJEU, 14 October 2010, Case C-280/08, [2010] ECR I-9555.

[288] Scarlet, CJEU, 24 November 2011, Case C-70/10, [2011] ECR I-11959.

[289] European Comm’n Decision of 13 February 2012, COMP/M.6381 – Google/Motorola Mobility, C(2012) 1068.

[290] Microsoft Corp. v Commission, General Court, 27 June 2012, T-167/08, ECLI:EU:T:2012:323.

[291] European Comm’n Decision of 29 April 2014, AT.39939, Samsung – Enforcement of UMTS Standard Essential Patents, C(2014) 2891 final.

[292] European Comm’n Decision of 29 April 2014, AT.39985, Motorola – Enforcement of GPRS Standard Essential Patents, C(2014) 2892 final.

[293] Huawei v ZTE, CJEU, C-170/13, 16 July 2015, ECLI:EU:C:2015:477.

[294] Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 19 August 2010, 2010/56889, Aventis v. Teva (Taxotere).

[295] Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 12 February 2010, 2010/51453, DuPont v. Mylan (Losartan) and 28 January 2011, 2011/50892, Novartis v. Actavis (Diovan).

[296] Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 29 November 2013, 2012/14922, Ericsson v. TCT Mobile Europe.

[297] Cour d’appel Lyon, 20 October 2009, 2008/06216, Mundipharma v. Mylan and Tribunal de grande instance Strasbourg, 10 March 2009, PIBD 2009, 899, Laboratoires Negma v. Biogaran.

[298] Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 28 January 2011, 2011/50892, Novartis v. Actavis (Diovan).

[299] Cour d’appel Paris, 21 March 2012, PIBD 2012, 963, Novartis v Mylan.

[300] Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 15 September 2009, PIBD 2010, 913, Radiante v. Medi.

[301] Tribunal de grande instance Paris, 8 December 2011, PIBD 2012, 956, Samsung v. Apple.

[302] Tribunale di Torino, 18 gennaio 2016, 30308/2015, Sisvel/ZTE;

[303] Tribunal de commerce Marseille, 20 September 2016, 2016F01637, Wiko v Sisvel.

[304] Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Düsseldorf 29 April 2010, BeckRS 2010, 15862 (Harnkatheterset). Oberlandesgericht

[305] Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Karlsruhe, 27 February 2012, WuW 2012, 508, GRUR 2012, 736 (Motorola v. Apple).

[306] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 9 December 2011, BeckRS 2011, 29013, MittdtPatA 2012, 120 (Motorola v Apple).

[307] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 2 May 2012, BeckRS 2012, 11804 (Motorola v. Microsoft).

[308] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 30 November 2006, NJOZ 2007, 2100, BeckRS 2007,06067, WuW 2007, 1278 (MPEG2)

[309] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 29 January 2016, BeckRS 2016, 04228 (NTT DoCoMo v. HTC Germany)

[310] Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice], 6 May 2009, BGHZ 180, 312, NJW-RR 2009, 1047, GRUR 2009, 694, WuW 2009,773 (Orange Book Standard).

[311] [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Düsseldorf, 29 May 2008, GRUR-RR 2008, 329 (Olanzapine).

[312] Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 17 maart 2010, IEPT 20100317, IEF 8682 (Philips/SK-Kassetten).

[313] Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 25 april 2007, IEPT 20070425, IEF 3891 (Philips/LG).

[314] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim 8 January 2016, 7 O 96/14, openJur 2016, 6027 (Pioneer)

[315] Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Karlsruhe, 23 April 2015, GRUR-RR 2015, 326 (Saint Lawrence v. Deutsche Telekom)

[316] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Mannheim, 27 November 2015, GRUR-RS 2015, 20077 (Saint Lawrence v. Deutsche Telekom)

[317] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 31 March 2016, ECLI:DE:LGD:2016:0331.4A.O126.14.00, BeckRS 2016,08040 (Saint Lawrence v. Vodafone)

[318] Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 14 oktober 2011, ECLI:NL:RBSGR:2011:BT7610 (Samsung/Apple).

[319] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 3 November 2015, ECLI:DE:LGD:2015:1103.4A.O144.14.00, GRUR-RS 2015, 19564 (Sisvel v. Haier)

[320] Oberlandesgericht [OLG] [Court of Appeal] Düsseldorf, 13 January 2016, ECLI:DE:OLGD:2016:0113.I15U65.15.00, BeckRS 2016, 01679 (Sisvel v. Haier)

[321] Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 14 maart 2012, ECLI:NL:RBSGR:2012:BV8871 (Samsung/Apple).

[322] Rechtbank [Rb] [District Court] Den Haag 10 maart 2011, IEPT 2011031, IEF 9463 (Sony/LG).

[323] Bundesgerichtshof [BGH] [Federal Court of Justice], 13 July 2004, BGHZ 160,167, IIC 2005, 741 (Standard-Spundfass)

[324] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 30 November 2006, BeckRS 2011, 06018 (Video Signal Encoding I)

[325] Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 13 February 2007, BeckRS 2008,07732 (GPRS); Landgericht [LG] [District Court] Düsseldorf, 17 April 2007, BeckRS 2007, 15905 (White Light LED II).

[326] Best It Worlds (India) Private Ltd. v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Case No. 4 of 2015, Competition Commission of India (May 12, 2015).

[327] Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd. v. Coca Cola Co. (1995), 5 SCC 545 (India).

[328] Intex Techs. (India) v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Case No. 76 of 2013, Competition Commission of India (January 16, 2014).

[329] Micromax Informatics, Ltd v Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Case No. 50 of 2013, Competition Commission of India (November 12, 2013).

[330] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Competition Comm’n of India, No. 1006 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (February 17, 2014).

[331] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Competition Comm’n of India, W.P. (C) No. 464 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (2016).

[332] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Gionee Communication Equipment Co. Ltd., Interim Application No. 17578 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 2010 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (October 31, 2013) (India).

[333] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Intex Techs. (India) Ltd., Interim Application No. 6735 of 2014 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 1045 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (March 13, 2015) (India).

[334] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. M/S Best IT World Private Ltd. (iBall), Interim Application 17351 of 2015 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 2501 of 2015, High Ct. of Delhi (September 2, 2015).

[335] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Mercury Elecs., Interim Application No. 3825 of 2013 and Interim Application No. 4694 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (November 12, 2014) (India).

[336] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Mercury Elecs., Interim Application No. 3825 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (March 6, 2013) (India).

[337] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Mercury Elecs., Interim Application No. 4694 of 2013 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (March 19, 2013) (India).

[338] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Xiaomi Tech., Interim Application No. 24580 of 2014 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 3775 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (December 8, 2014) (India).

[339] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Xiaomi Tech., Interim Application No. 3074 of 2015 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 3775 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (2014) (India).

[340] Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericssson v. Micromax Informatics Ltd. & Others, CCP No. 71 of 2015 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 442 of 2013, High Ct. of Delhi (December 2, 2015) (India).

[341] Vringo Infrastructure Inc. v. IndiaMART Intermesh Ltd., Interim Application No. 2112 of 2014 in Civil Suit (Original Side) No. 314 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (August 5, 2014).

[342] Xiaomi Tech. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, First Appeal Order (Original Side) No. 522 of 2014, High Ct. of Delhi (2014) (India).

[343] YU Televentures Private Ltd. v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericssson & Others, LPA 888 of 2015 and C.Ms. No. 30187–88, 30582 of 2015 in Crl.M.A. 18179 of 2015, High Ct. of Delhi (December 11, 2015) (India).

[344] Tribunale di Trieste, 29.7 2011, Ericsson/Onda. Giur. dir. ind., 2013, 245.

[345] Tribunale di Roma, 8 luglio 2011, Ericsson/ZTE. Giur. dir. ind., 2013, 211.

[346] Tribunale di Lodi, 9 giugno 2003, Misal Erexons/Mitam.

[347] Tribunale di Genoa, 8.5.2004, 2521/0-2538/04, Philips/Italcard. Giur. dir. ind., 2006, 175.

[348] Tribunale di Milano, 5.12012, 45629-1-2011 and 59734-2011, Samsung/Apple. Giur. dir. ind., 2014, 51.

[349] Tribunale di Bologna, 3.1.2005, 4847/1, Soc. Sig Alfa/Soc. Sacmi Labelling. Giur. dir. ind., 2005, 625.

[350] Apple Japan Godo Kaisha v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Tokyo District Court Decisions of Feb. 28, 2013, case number 2011 (yo) 22027 and 2011 (yo) 22098, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/23yo22027full.pdf and www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/23yo22098full.pdf

[351] Apple Japan Godo Kaisha v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., IP High Court (Grand Panel) Decisions of May 16, 2014, case number 2013 (ra) 10007 Hanrei Jiho No. 2224, p.146 case 2, Hanrei Times No.1402 p.166 case 2 and 2013 (ra) 10008, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/25_ra_10007zenbun.pdf and www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/25_ra_10008zenbun.pdf

[352] Imation K.K. v. One-Blue L.L.C., Tokyo District Court Judgment of February 18, 2015, case number 2013 (wa) 21383, Hanrei Jiho No. 2257, p. 87, Hanrei Times No. 1412, p. 265

[353] Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan Godo Kaisha, Tokyo District Court Judgment of Feb. 28, 2013, case number 2011 (wa) 38969, Hanrei Jiho No. 2186, p154, Hanrei Times No. 1390 p.81, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/23_wa_38969.pdf

[354] Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Japan Godo Kaisha, IP High Court (Grand Panel) Judgment of May 16, 2014, case number 2013 (ne) 10043, Hanrei Jiho No. 2224, p.146 case 1, Hanrei Times No. 1402, p.166 case 1, translation available at www.ip.courts.go.jp/eng/vcms_lf/25ne10043full.pdf

[355] Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. Apple Korea Ltd., [Seoul S. Cent. D.C.], 2011GaHap39552, August 24, 2012 (S. Kor.).

[356] Qualcomm Inc. v. Korea Fair Trade Commission, [KFTC], 2009JiSik0329, December 30, 2009, aff’d in part, [Seoul High Ct.], 2010Nu3932, June 19, 2013 (S. Kor.).

[357] Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V. v SK Kassetten GmbH & Co. KG, District Court The Hague, The Netherlands, March 17, 2010, Joint Cases No. 316533/HA ZA 08-2522 and 316535/HA ZA 08-2524.

[358] Sony Supply Chain Solutions (Europe) BV v. LG Electronics Inc., District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands, March 10, 2011, No. 389067/KG ZA 11–269.

[359] American Cyanamid v. Ethicon Ltd [1975] AC 396 (HL).

[360] Hope v. Carnegie (1866) 1 Ch.App. 320.

[361] HTC Corporation v Nokia Corporation [2013] EWHC 3778 (Pat).

[362] Huawei v. Samsung and Google [2015] EWHC 3366 (Pat) Case No: HP-2014-000005.

[363] IPCom GmbH & Co. KG v. HTC Europe Co. Ltd. [2017] EWCA Civ. 90 (February 28, 2017).

[364] Lord Portarlington v. Soulby (1834) 3 My & K. 104, 40 Eng. Rep. 40.

[365] Navitaire Inc v. EasyJet Airline Co Ltd (No 2) [2004] EWHC 2271 (Ch).

[366] Nokia Corporation v. InterDigital Technology Corporation [2004] EWHC 2920, appealed in April 2005 at [2005] EWCA Civ 614).

[367] Nokia Corporation v. InterDigital Technology Corporation [2006] EWHC 802 (Pat).

[368] Peck v. Jenness, 48 U.S. (7 How.) 612 (1849).

[369] Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. v. Unwired Planet Inc., 2016 EWCA Civ 489 (UK Ct. Appeal, May 27, 2016).

[370] Series 5 Software Ltd v Clarke [1996] 1 All ER 853 (Ch.).

[371] Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting Co [1895] 1 Ch 287 (CA).

[372] Unwired Planet Intl. Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. [2015] EWHC 3366 (Pat.) (November 23, 2015).

[373] Unwired Planet Intl. Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. [2017] EWHC 711 (Pat) (April 5, 2017)

[374] Unwired Planet v. Samsung [2016] EWCA (Civ) 489.

[375] Vringo Infrastructure v ZTE [2015] EWHC 214 (Pat).

The Cambridge Handbook of Technical Standardization Law

Competition, Antitrust, and Patents

Book description

Refine List

Actions for selected content:

Save Search

Contents

References

Cases

United States

China

European Union

France

Germany

India

Italy

Japan

Korea

Netherlands

United Kingdom

Legislative and Agency Materials

United States

China

European Union

France

Germany

India

Japan

Korea

United Kingdom

United Nations

SSO and Patent Pool Materials

Books, Articles and Online Materials

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Book summary page views

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

Accessibility Information