A Resolution of My Own
If the Berkeley City Council thinks it knows what's best for Boalties, I figure so do I. But the proposal I have in mind is a lot less kooky, therefore, boring.
Adam Chandler has this essay at Slate on cert stage amicus briefs. Orin Kerr thinks this might be a good idea for law school SCOTUS clinics.
That's the background. Now what I see is Boalt doing this for IP/Tech cases--both at the SCOTUS and at the Federal Circuit. We have plenty of professors admitted to the bars of both. If they're willing and able (and possibly coaxed by some extra $$$ from DE's fundraising), then we can easily have an appellate IP/Tech law clinic. This would be an invaluable experience for the IP folks going into the litigation side. It would also be a great experience for any litigator in general.
Are there any downsides/barriers?
Adam Chandler has this essay at Slate on cert stage amicus briefs. Orin Kerr thinks this might be a good idea for law school SCOTUS clinics.
That's the background. Now what I see is Boalt doing this for IP/Tech cases--both at the SCOTUS and at the Federal Circuit. We have plenty of professors admitted to the bars of both. If they're willing and able (and possibly coaxed by some extra $$$ from DE's fundraising), then we can easily have an appellate IP/Tech law clinic. This would be an invaluable experience for the IP folks going into the litigation side. It would also be a great experience for any litigator in general.
Are there any downsides/barriers?
posted by Armen Adzhemyan at 10:18 AM
14 Comments:
Appellate Advocacy was one of my favorite classes this semester, and I would be all over another appellate clinic. But isn't there some kind of limitation on amicus briefs? Doesn't the Court have to approve them first?
Actually, that's not a limitation or barrier at all. Whether a brief is accepted for filing is irrelevant to the training gleaned from writing it.
Another notable benefit -- it might convince Toney to take Civ Pro II.
You do realize that Boalt already has an IP/tech clinic that does this sort of thing, right?
I'm with Patrick on this. I'd be all over an appellate clinic. I actually joined the clinical committee last year with one of my goals being to get an appellate or SCOTUS clinic started here. (I was looking for it to be general, not IP-specific, though - the Samuelson Clinic already does some IP-specific appellate work.)
Sad thing is, we - i.e., myself and the other student representative - learned quite quickly that the barriers to getting a clinic started through the institutional mechanisms currently in place are pretty much insurmountable. So there's that...
10:56, I wasn't a techie, so I really don't know the going-ons. But what I was thinking of was a clinic dedicated to appellate advocacy that focused on IP/tech issues. If there is such a thing, it's not heavily advertised.
The Samuelson clinic does just this, or at least so I'm told. And though I haven't participated myself (yet), if you get the opportunity, I highly recommend working with Pam Samuelson. Very few people know (or care) as much as she does about copyright. In fact, very few people are aware of the effects copyright has on our everyday lives.
Though I should note the Samuelson clinic is involved in all tech policy, most of which is not directly related to copyright. But her copyright knowledge will dazzle you.
Yeah, Samuelson Clinic does this. It's not *all* that the clinic does, but they've been involved in quite a few tech-related amicus briefs just in the last couple of years.
samuelson clinic did oral arguments in Chamberlain (garage door opener DMCA case) at the Federal Circuit.
I think Armen's suggestion is a section within the clinic that exclusively does appellate work.
As opposed to "a little bit of everything" that the Clinic does now (I think).
I think that's right Carbolic. What I envision is an appellate advocacy clinic. I think the high tech/IP angle obviously tailors to our strong suit. Plus there are tons of Bay Area entities that can serve as clients for these amici briefs. It sounds like just expanding the Samuelson Clinic to a more robust appellate advocacy side would do the trick.
And the Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit has asked for more amicus briefing.
I think it's a good idea. And it shouldn't be limited to IP/tech. There should also be an appellate clinic for non-IP/tech folks.
One downside would be the current Court hearing more about issues that we care about. The Kerr post points out that cert level amicus briefs make cert more likely to be granted. I don't want the current members of the court looking at any of the issues near and dear to me.
Same goes for Fed Circuit rehearing things en banc. Although Bilski may point to brighter days.
5:08 - I'm with you on both accounts. Specifically, I'm really nervous about software, and the fact that there was no such thing for a good chunk of the influential years of several members of the Fed. Cir. When Bilski came down, I thought to myself "this might be just enough to buy us another 10 years".
But there is no denying that the litigators among us would REALLY benefit from expanding Samuelson's clinic like Armen proposes.
MPRE Score Reports are available today.
Post a Comment
<< Home