1
 In an age of specialization, the federal judiciary is one of the last bastions of the generalist.
5002
span

2
 A judge must jump from murder to antitrust cases, from arson to securities fraud, 
5001
span

3
without missing a beat.
2
manner

4
 But even on the federal bench, specialization is creeping in,
5004
span

5
 and it has become a subject of sharp controversy on the newest federal appeals court.
4
elaboration-additional

6
 The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was created in 1982 
5005
span

7
to serve, among other things, as the court of last resort for most patent disputes.
6
purpose

8
 Previously, patent cases moved through the court system to one of the 12 circuit appeals courts. 
5008
span

9
There, judges 
5009
span

10
who saw few such cases 
5010
List

11
and had no experience in the field 
5010
List

12
grappled with some of the most technical and complex disputes imaginable. 
5011
Same-Unit

13
 A new specialty court was sought by patent experts,
5012
span

14
 who believed 
15
attribution

15
that the generalists had botched too many important, multimillion-dollar cases.
5013
span

16
 Some patent lawyers had hoped 
17
attribution

17
that such a specialty court would be filled with experts in the field.
5015
span

18
 But the Reagan administration thought otherwise,
5017
List

19
 and so may the Bush administration.
5017
List

20
 Since 1984, the president has filled four vacancies in the Federal Circuit court with non-patent lawyers. 
5023
span

21
Now only three of the 12 judges 
5020
span

22
-- Pauline Newman, Chief Judge Howard T. Markey, 68, and Giles Rich, 85 -- 
21
elaboration-set-member-e

23
have patent-law backgrounds.
5021
Same-Unit

24
 The latter two and Judge Daniel M. Friedman, 73, are approaching senior status or retirement.
5021
elaboration-additional

25
 Three seats currently are vacant 
5024
List

26
and three others are likely to be filled within a few years, 
5024
List

27
so patent lawyers and research-based industries are making a new push 
5026
span

28
for specialists to be added to the court.
27
elaboration-object-attribute-e

29
 Several organizations,
5028
span

30
 including the Industrial Biotechnical Association and the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association,
29
elaboration-set-member-e

31
 have asked the White House and Justice Department to name candidates with both patent and scientific backgrounds.
5029
Same-Unit

32
 The associations would like the court to include between three and six judges with specialized training.
5029
elaboration-additional

33
 Some of the associations have recommended Dr. Alan D. Lourie, 54, a former patent agent with a doctorate in organic chemistry 
5032
span

34
who now is associate general counsel with SmithKline Beckman Corp. in Philadelphia.
33
elaboration-additional

35
 Dr. Lourie says 
36
attribution

36
the Justice Department interviewed him last July. 
5033
span

37
 Their effort has received a lukewarm response from the Justice Department.
5042
span

38
 We do not feel 
5038
attribution-n

39
that seats are reserved 
5038
span

40
(for patent lawyers),
39
elaboration-additional-e

41
 says Justice spokesman David Runkel, 
5040
span

42
who declines to say 
5044
attribution-n

43
how soon a candidate will be named.
5044
span

44
 But we will take it into consideration.
43
elaboration-additional

45
 The Justice Department's view is shared by other lawyers and at least one member of the court, Judge H. Robert Mayer, a former civil litigator
5045
span

46
 who served at the claims court trial level 
45
elaboration-object-attribute-e

47
before he was appointed to the Federal Circuit two years ago. 
5045
temporal-before

48
I believe 
49
attribution

49
that any good lawyer should be able to figure out and understand patent law, 
5047
span

50
Judge Mayer says, 
5047
attribution

51
adding 
5052
elaboration-additional

52
that it's the responsibility of highly paid lawyers 
5051
span

53
(who argue before the court)
52
elaboration-object-attribute-e

54
 to make us understand 
5053
span

55
(complex patent litigation).
54
elaboration-additional

56
 Yet some lawyers point to Eli Lilly & Co. vs. Medtronic, Inc., the patent infringement case the
5056
span

57
 Supreme Court this month agreed to review, as an example of poor legal reasoning by judges 
5057
span

58
who lack patent litigation experience. 
57
elaboration-object-attribute

59
(Judge Mayer was not on the three-member panel.) 
5056
elaboration-additional

60
 In the Lilly case, the appeals court broadly construed a federal statute 
5059
span

61
to grant Medtronic, a medical device manufacturer, an exemption 
5060
span

62
to infringe a patent under certain circumstances.
61
purpose-e

63
 If the Supreme Court holds in Medtronic's favor, 
5063
condition

64
the decision will have billion-dollar consequences for the manufacturers of medical devices, color and food additives and all other non-drug products 
5063
span

65
that required Food & Drug Administration approval.
64
elaboration-object-attribute-e

66
 Lisa Raines, a lawyer and director of government relations for the Industrial Biotechnical Association, contends 
67
attribution

67
that a judge well-versed in patent law and the concerns of research-based industries would have ruled otherwise.
5066
span

68
 And Judge Newman, a former patent lawyer, wrote in her dissent
5067
attribution

69
 when the court denied a motion for a rehearing of the case by the full court, 
5067
Cause-Result

70
The panel's judicial legislation has affected an important high-technological industry,
5069
span

71
 without regard to the consequences for research and innovation or the public interest.
70
manner

72
 Says Ms. Raines, 
5071
attribution

73
(The judgment)
5071
Same-Unit

74
 confirms our concern 
5072
span

75
that the absence of patent lawyers on the court could prove troublesome.
74
elaboration-object-attribute

5001
span
1
explanation-argumentative

5002
span
5003
Contrast

5003
multinuc
5006
span

5004
span
5003
Contrast

5005
span
5007
span

5006
span



5007
span
5003
elaboration-additional

5008
span
5005
background

5009
span
5011
Same-Unit

5010
multinuc
9
elaboration-object-attribute-e

5011
multinuc
5014
Problem-Solution

5012
span
5018
span

5013
span
13
elaboration-additional-e

5014
multinuc
8
elaboration-additional

5015
span
5016
Contrast

5016
multinuc
5019
span

5017
multinuc
5016
Contrast

5018
span
5014
Problem-Solution

5019
span
5012
elaboration-additional

5020
span
5021
Same-Unit

5021
multinuc
5022
span

5022
span
20
elaboration-additional

5023
span
5025
span

5024
multinuc
5023
elaboration-additional

5025
span
5027
Problem-Solution

5026
span
5031
span

5027
multinuc
5016
background

5028
span
5029
Same-Unit

5029
multinuc
5030
span

5030
span
5035
span

5031
span
5027
Problem-Solution

5032
span
5034
span

5033
span
5032
elaboration-additional

5034
span
5043
span

5035
span
5026
elaboration-additional

5036
span



5037
span
5039
span

5038
span
5037
span

5039
span
37
explanation-argumentative

5040
span
5037
attribution

5041
span
41
elaboration-additional-e

5042
span
5055
span

5043
span
5030
elaboration-additional

5044
span
5041
span

5045
span
5046
span

5046
span
5054
span

5047
span
5048
span

5048
span
5049
span

5049
span
5046
explanation-argumentative

5050
span
5048
elaboration-additional-e

5051
span
5052
Same-Unit

5052
multinuc
5050
span

5053
span
5052
Same-Unit

5054
span
5042
example

5055
span
5065
Contrast

5056
span
5058
span

5057
span
56
explanation-argumentative

5058
span
5061
span

5059
span
5064
span

5060
span
60
elaboration-object-attribute-e

5061
span
5075
span

5062
span
5059
elaboration-additional

5063
span
5062
span

5064
span
5058
elaboration-additional

5065
multinuc
5034
elaboration-additional

5066
span
5073
span

5067
multinuc
5068
span

5068
span
5066
elaboration-additional

5069
span
5067
Cause-Result

5070
span
5073
elaboration-additional

5071
multinuc
5070
span

5072
span
5071
Same-Unit

5073
span
5074
span

5074
span
5061
elaboration-additional

5075
span
5065
Contrast

