شواهد روشن و قانع‌کننده در دعاوی ابطال اختراع با تأکید بر حقوق آمریکا و نگاهی به حقوق ایران

References

Afrasiyab, M. (2021). Industrial property in Iran’s legal system with Emphasis onJudicial Practice (Trademark, Industrial Design, Invention). Tehran: Elm va Danesh. [in Persian]

Al-Masi., et al. (2024). A Semiotic Research in Uncovering Truth Through Evidence in Civil Procedure. Journal of Legal Studies, 16(4), 221–248. 10.22099/jls.2023.48422.5016, [In Persian]

Alsan, M., & Manouchehri, M. R. (2018). Evaluation of the Authenticity of Electronic Evidence and its Probative Value. Journal of Legal Studies, 10(2), 10.22099/jls.2018.28058.2765 [In Persian]

American Intellectual Property Law Association (2018). AIPLA’s model Patent Jury Instructions,(Visited on: 08/21/2025), Available at: https://www.aipla.org/detail/jury-instructions

American Intellectual Property Law Association (2024). AIPLA’s model Patent Jury Instructions (2024 ed.). (Visited on: 08/21/2025(, Available at: https://www.aipla.org/default-source/2024

Bahadori Jahromi, Z (2021). The principle of patent validity and its Implementation in the Iranian legal system. Private Law Journal, 18(1), 203–225. https://doi.org/10.22059/jolt.2020.304048.1006862. [in Persian]

Bock, J. W (2014). An Experimental Assessment of the Presumption of Validity [Unpublished manuscript]. UC Berkeley School of Law. (visited on: 08/21/2025(, Available at: https://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/Bock_Jeremy.pdf

Conway, M. J (2018). i4i makes the Patent World Blind. The University of Chicago Law Review, 85(6), 1463–1495.

Dalir, R., Delshad Maaref, E., & Amini, E. (2023). Evaluation of Evidence and the Standard of Proof in International Commercial Arbitration. Comparative Law Review, 10(1), 245–266,  https://doi.org/10.22096/law.2023.531944.1894, [In Persian].

Dubis, J. W. (2015). Inter partes review: A multi-method comparison for challenging patent validity. Cybaris®, 6(2), Article 4. (visited on: 08/21/2025(, Available at https://open.mitchellhamline.edu/cybaris/vol6/iss2/4

Guerra, A., & Kundu, T. (2024). Presumption of Patent Validity and Litigation Incentives. )Visited on: 08/21/2025(, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3477505, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3477505

Guerra, A., Luppi, B., & Parisi, F. (2018). Standards of Proof and Civil Litigation: A Game-Theoretic Analysis. Faculty Scholarship, University of Minnesota Law School. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://scholarship. aw.umn.edu/faculty_articles/1735/, 10.1515/bejte-2017-0005

Gugliuzza, P. R. (2021). Law, Fact, and Patent Validity (Temple University Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2020-11). Iowa Law Review, 106, 607.) visited on: 08/21/2025. Available at. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3583043

Gugliuzza, P. R. (2022). Patent Law’s Deference Paradox. Minnesota Law Review, 106(6), 1397–1448. )Visited on: 08/21/2025. Available at https://minnesotalawreview. rg/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/5-Gugliuzza_Web.pdf

Matal, J. (2023, November 8). Statement of Joseph Matal, Clear IP, LLC: Reforming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board—The PREVAIL Act and Proposals to Promote U.S. Innovation Leadership. U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Visited on: 08/21/2025. Available at https://www. udiciary.senate.gov/hearings/reforming-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board_the-prevail-act-and-proposals-to-promote-us-innovation-leadership

Meidani, S. H. (2012). The Standard of Proof in the Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice. Quarterly Journal of the Faculty of Law and Political Science, 42(1), 161–179,  10.22059/jlq.2012.29822, [In Persian].

Mollavali, M. (2022). The Required Standard of Proof and the THreshold of Evidence in Islamic Jurisprudence and legal Systems. Foundations of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, 15(1), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.30495/jijl.2022.68721.1, [In Persian].

Rahimi, H., & Khodarahmi, N. (2023). The Impact of Uncertainty on the Incentive of the Injurer in Fault-based Liability with an Economic Approach. Journal of Legal Studies, Vol 15 (Issue 12), 122-145. 10.22099/jls.2023.44408.4784, [In Persian]

Reilly, G. (2022). The Justiciability of Cancelled Patents. Washington and Lee Law Review, 79(1), 253–308. (Visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://scholarlycommons. aw.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol79/iss1/6

Rollor, C. R. (2013). Logic, not Evidence, Supports a Change in Expert Testimony Standards: Why Evidentiary Standards Promulgated by the Supreme Court for Scientific Expert Testimony are Inappropriate and Inefficient when Applied in Patent Infringement Suits. Journal of Business & Technology Law, 8(1), Article 20. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://digitalcommons. aw.umaryland.edu/iss1/20

Seaman, C. B. (2015). Empirical Studies relating to Patents - Presumption of Validity. In P. Menell, D. Schwartz, & B. Depoorter (Eds.), Research handbook on the Economics of Intellectual Property Law - Vol. II: Analytical Methods (Forthcoming). Edward Elgar. (Visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://ssrn. om/abstract=2671581

Vishnubhakat, S. (2022). Patent Inconsistency. Indiana Law Journal, 97, 59. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://scholarship. aw.tamu.edu/facscholar/1530

Cases

 Court of Appeals of Tehran Province (2012, October 23). Judgment No. 9109970221201028: Criteria for Validity of new Patent Registration compared to Prior Inventions. National Judicial Opinions System of Iran. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://ara. ri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/446 [in Persian]

Court of Appeals of Tehran Province (2015, April 25). Judgment No. 9109980226300694: Conditions for a Patentable Invention (Final Judgment). National Judicial Opinions System of Iran. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://ara. ri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/31106 [in Persian]

Court of Appeals of Tehran Province (2016, April 11). Judgment No. 9209980226300563: Description of a Product with Patentability. National Judicial Opinions System of Iran. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://ara. ri.ac.ir/Judge/Text/31106 [in Persian]

Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. Partnership, 564 U.S. 91 (2011). Docket No. 10-290. (visited on: 08/21/2025). Available at https://supreme. ustia.com/cases/federal/us/564/91/