Paul M. Janicke

Professor Janicke teaches in the Intellectual Property and Information Law Program at the University of Houston Law Center. The program encompasses patent, copyright, trademark, and trade secret law, as well as related licensing subjects, and repeatedly ranks in the top ten IP programs nationally.

Professor Janicke is a graduate of New York University Law School. After serving in the Navy JAG Corps, he received an LL.M. degree in patent and trade regulation law from The George Washington University Law Center. He came to the University of Houston Law Center in 1992, after more than 20 years in private practice of patent litigation with the Houston law firm of Arnold, White & Durkee, where he was outside patent counsel for clients such as Shell Oil Company and Compaq Computer Corp.

He now teaches Evidence, Patent Law, Patent Litigation, an introductory survey course in Intellectual Property Law, and a seminar for Advanced Topics in Intellectual Property Law. He has published extensively in the fields of patent, trademark, and licensing law.

COURSES:

• Patent Remedies & Defenses
• Evidence
• Advanced Topics Seminar in IP Law
• Licensing & Technology Transfer
• Intellectual Property Survey

Selected Recent Articles:

• Patent Venue And Convenience Transfer: New World Or Small Shift? 11 N.C.J.L. & TECH. ON. 1 (2009)
• Die Reform des U.S. Patentrechts im Jahr 2007, 56 GEWERBLICHER RECHTSSCHUTZ UND URHEBERRECHT INTERNATIONAL TEIL 791 (2007)
• Patent Jury Verdicts: Myths and Realities, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TODAY (July 2007) 18
• Four Key Points in the Current Patent Reform Effort in the United States, 5 ICFAI J. INTELL. PROP. RIGHTS 14 (November 2006) (Hyderabad, India)
• Two Unsettled Areas of the Federal Circuit’s Patent Jurisdiction, 11 VA. J. L. & TECH. 1 (2006)
• Who Wins Patent Infringement Cases? 34 AM. INTELL. PROP. L. ASSOC. Q.J. 1 (2006) (with LiLan Ren)
• On the Causes of Unpredictability of Federal Circuit Decisions in Patent Cases, 3 NORTHWESTERN J. TECH. & INTELL. PROP. 93 (2005); reprinted in 4 ICFAI J. INTELL. PROP. RIGHTS, August 2006 (New Delhi, India)
• “Maybe We Shouldn’t Arbitrate”: Some Aspects of the Risk/Benefit Calculus of Agreeing To Binding Arbitration of Patent Disputes, 39 HOUS. L. REV. 693 (2002)
• To Be Or Not To Be: The Long Gestation of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 69 J. ANTITRUST L. 645 (2002)