UC Hastings College of the Law was founded in 1878 as the first law department of the University of California, and today is one of the top-rated law schools in the United States. Our alumni span the globe and are among the most respected lawyers, judges and business leaders today. Our faculty are nationally renowned as both teachers and scholars.

UC Hastings College of the Law

New Row

Contact expert @[Full Name](fullname), @[Job Title](job_title) at @[Organization](organization) for media, speaking, professional opportunities and more.

@[Full Name](fullname) at @[Organization](organization) | Contact Form

Expert Inquiry

Open Sans

Presented in 2012 by the UC Hastings Board of Directors for founding	the Innovation Law Clinics and the Law & Bioscience Project.

Visionary Award

Elected to the American Law Institute; Appointed as advisor to the ALI's Restatement of Copyright Project

Elected Member

Awarded by the University of California at Hastings.

William Rutter Award for Excellence in Teaching

1066 Foundation Award for Scholarship

Honored by the American Lawyer Publications as one of the Women Leaders in Law & Technology.

Women Leaders in Law & Technology

Federalism, First Amendment & Patents: The Fraud Fallacy

Does Patent Licensing Mean Innovation?

Patent Demands and Initial Public Offerings

Coming of Age for the Federal Circuit

Patent Demands & Startup Companies: The View from the Venture Capital Community

Scientific and technological innovations are forcing patent law into the spotlight and revealing its many glaring inadequacies. Take, for example, the patent case that almost shut down the BlackBerry, or the growing phenomenon of patent trolling, in which patents are acquired for the sole purpose of entrapping companies whose products relate to them. And patents on genes have everyone up in arms—and our courts confused.   Robin Feldman explains why patents are causing so much trouble. The problem lies in our assumption that patents set clear boundaries for rights to an invention. In reality, they do no such thing. The very nature of inventions makes them impossible to describe unambiguously for all time. When something is so new that we do not understand yet how it works, what it is capable of doing, or how it could be applied—as is often the case in biotechnology—description is necessarily slippery.   Instead of hoping for clear boundaries, and moaning when we don’t get them, Rethinking Patent Law urges lawmakers to focus on what the law can do well: craft rules that anticipate the bargaining that will occur as rights unfold. By steering clear of laws that distort the bargaining process, lawmakers can help courts answer difficult questions, such as whether genes, software, and business methods constitute patentable subject matter, whether patents in the life sciences should control inventions that have yet to be discovered, and how to resolve the battles between pharmaceutical companies and generics.

Rethinking Patent Law

The allure of science has always captivated members of the legal profession.  Its siren's song offers a tune of perfection and the promise of endowing law with the respect and deference from society that lawyers crave.  Both the bench and the bar continually look to science to rescue them from the discomfort of difficult legal decisions, and are frequently disappointed with the results.    While most authors frame problems at the intersection of law and science in terms of how rapidly scientific information changes and how frequently the legal system distorts science, this book argues that problems at the intersection of law and science flow not from the changing nature of science, but from the changing nature of law.  With this in mind, the book uses examples from doctrines related to abortion, gene patenting, copyright, environmental regulation, antitrust law, the insanity defense, and other doctrines to explore the nature of law and to suggest approaches for making science work more effectively within the domain of law.

The Role of Science in Law

Professor Robin Feldman received a bachelor's degree from Stanford University and a J.D. from Stanford Law School, graduating the Order of the Coif and receiving the Urban A. Sontheimer Award for graduating second in the class. Professor Feldman also served in the Articles Department of the Stanford Law Review. After graduation, she clerked for The Honorable Joseph Sneed of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Professor Feldman holds the Harry & Lillian Hastings Chair. She has received the Rutter Award for Teaching Excellence, the Visionary Award from the UC Hastings Board of Directors, and the 1066 Foundation Award for Scholarship. In 2015, she was honored by the American Lawyer Publications as one of the Women Leaders in Law & Tech, and was the sole academic to receive the honor.

Professor Feldman has published two books, Rethinking Patent Law (Harvard 2012) and The Role of Science in Law (Oxford 2009), as well as an extensive number of articles in journals at laws schools including Yale Stanford, Columbia, Virginia, and Georgetown and in the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Economic Review.  Her work has been cited by the White House and by numerous federal and state agencies and members of Congress. She has provided testimony and commentary for committees of the US Congress and the California legislature, as well as the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, the Patent & Trademark Office, and the National Academy of Sciences. Professor Feldman has chaired the Executive Committee of the Antitrust Section of the American Association of Law Schools and has served as the Herman Phleger Visiting Professor of Law at Stanford Law School. She was elected to the American Law Institute in 2012 where she serves as an advisor to the ALI's Restatement of Copyright Project. 

Professor Feldman is also the Director of the UC Hastings Institute for Innovation Law, which is dedicated to data-driven law-making and the active classroom. As part of the Institute, Professor Feldman runs the Startup Legal Garage, which has been named one of the most innovative law school program in the country and recognized by the American Association of Law Schools as one of the nation's "Innovative & Other Outstanding Programs." More information on the Institute, including disclosures on funding, can be found at http://innovation.uchastings.edu/.

Artificial Intelligence & Machine Learning

Intellectual Property

Startup & Innovation Law

Privacy and Property Law

Law & Science

Pharmaceutical Competition

Curriculum Vitae

Publications

Courses

Institute for Innovation Law

Startup Legal Garage

Privacy and Technology Project

Law Review Articles on SSRN

Is there a conservative view on patent reform?

Copyright Issues Hinder MMSE Use

Patent 'trolls' target companies going public: study

Why patents are holding back U.S. Innovation

Study shows patent licenses don't lead to tech transfer

What Inventors Should Know About Intellectual Property

Patent Trolling—Why Bio & Pharmaceuticals Are at Risk

Harry & Lillian Hastings Distinguished Professor of Law ; Director of the Institute for Innovation Law

The US Supreme Court has granted review in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics on the specific question, "Are human genes patentable?" UC Hastings College of the Law Professor Robin Feldman discusses that question, plus the "quartet of Supreme Court patent law decisions" that she believes may soon become a "quintet."
 
Professor Robin Feldman's work is widely regarded as some of the most influential scholarship in the field of patent law. She offered significant commentary to multiple media outlets during the Apple v. Samsung patent lawsuit and its recent groundbreaking decision. Her latest book, Rethinking Patent Law, was published by Harvard University Press in 2012 and explains patent bargaining. Her bio and publications are available at http://tinyurl.com/robinfeldman.

Professor Robin Feldman on Myriad

Best of Investing Radio Show March 7, 2015 guest Robin Feldman, discussing patent trolls. Mark answers the question of how one can get a 100% LTV loan, and Patti discusses the pros and cons of a large real estate firm vs. a smaller one.

Best of Investing Radio Show March 7, 2015 guest Robin Feldman

Moderator:
Professor Michael Risch, Villanova University

Panelists:
Professor Rochelle Dreyfuss, New York University
Professor Robin Feldman, U.C. Hastings
Gary Loeb, Genentech
Vern Norviel, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati


The first speaker on the second panel was Professor Rochelle Dreyfuss of New York University, who argued that the patent system must not permit patent-holders to preempt broad fields of research. Using the field of genetic diagnostics as a case study, Professor Dreyfuss proposed that the patent system should inquire into whether a claimed process could be "invented around" as a clue to patentability. Professor Dreyfuss was followed by Professor Robin Feldman of the University of California at Hastings, who illustrated her own theory of patentable subject matter and preemption by focusing on the recent case challenging gene patents (Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. U. S. Patent & Trademark Office). The third speaker, Gary Loeb, represented a non-academic perspective from his experience as Vice President of Intellectual Property at Genentech. Mr. Loeb urged a distinction between medical tests aimed purely at diagnosis and those tied to potential therapeutic use, supporting stronger patent protection for the latter category. Finally, Vern Norviel of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati compared patent protection in the biotechnology and computer technology realms. He described the higher barriers to research in the biotechnology field, and argued that there was a correspondingly greater need for patent incentives. The panel was ably moderated by Professor Michael Risch of Villanova University, whose research focuses on intellectual property and cyberspace law.

Select Inquiry Type