Abstract

     Notwithstanding the increased frequency of assertion of the patent exhaustion defense in recent years, there is no clearly perceived standard for its application. The Supreme Court’s 1942 Univis Lens decision, the controlling authority on patent exhaustion, mandated that the authorized disposition of an article embodying the essential features of a patent claim exhausts the patentee’s exclusive right in that claim. Sixty-two years later, Univis Lens is still misinterpreted. However, a coherent reading of the essential features dictate of Univis Lens and subsequent caselaw compels the conclusion that, in the context of patent exhaustion, essential features are patentably distinctive features. This conclusion provides an analytical framework for determining whether the doctrine should apply in a given factual situation and also resolves the apparent conflicts between the patent exhaustion and related doctrines.