T. Spehar, Can Unpredictable New Technology Satisfy Enablement? Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Calgene, Inc., 188 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1999), Biotechnology Law Report, vol.20, issue.1, pp.1-9, 2001.

, Slip Opinion: Merck KGaA v. Integra LifeSciences I, Ltd., et al., Biotechnology Law Report, vol.24, issue.5, pp.651-658, 2005.

T. Spehar, Can Unpredictable New Technology Satisfy Enablement? Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Calgene, Inc., 188 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 1999), Biotechnology Law Report, vol.20, issue.1, pp.1-9, 2001.

L. Ahn, This Is Not a Creche: ACLU v. Schundler, 104 F. 3d 1435 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 2434 (1997), The Yale Law Journal, vol.107, issue.6, p.1969, 1998.

E. D. Va, 764 F. Supp. 2d, vol.807, 2011.

D. Jain, Substantial determination of FRAND licence terms and competition issues by UK high court, Jindal Global Law Review, vol.8, issue.2, pp.231-240, 2017.

L. G. Düsseldorf, Schadensersatz bei privatem Filesharing eines Hörbuchs, JurPC, pp.11-11, 2016.

M. I. Sanders, Joint Ventures Involving Tax-Exempt Organizations, re Innovatio IP Ventures, vol.5593609, 2013.

D. High-court, RAMSAY v LM ERICSSON PTY LTD, Victorian Reports, vol.[1989] VR, pp.383-385, 1989.

D. High-court, RAMSAY v LM ERICSSON PTY LTD, Victorian Reports, vol.[1989] VR, pp.383-385, 1989.

D. High-court, Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v Intex Techs (India) Ltd. See Sidak, p.10, 2015.

A. Layne-farrar and K. W. Wong-ervin, Methodologies for Calculating Frand Damages: An Economic and Comparative Analysis of the Case Law from China, the European Union, India, and the United States, SSRN Electronic Journal, 2017.

, Reinton, Sigurd Evang, (born 9 Nov. 1941), Director: NATS Holdings Ltd, 2007?13; NHS Improvement, since 2016 (Director, Monitor, 2012?16); Aubin Holdings Ltd, since 2017, TCL Communications Technology Holdings Ltd v Ericsson Telefonaktienbolaget, 2007.

C. M. ,

;. M. Further and . Dhenne, Since then, there has been a decrease in this litigation in the US with a corresponding increase in Europe, and particularly in Germany, a country known for its bifurcated system under, Propr. Industr. Étude, vol.9, 2016.

M. Dhenne, Technique et droit des brevets: L'invention en droit des brevets, We have already criticised this legal insecurity. See M. Dhenne, 2015.

M. Dhenne, L'appréciation de la brevetabilité des inventions mises en oeuvre par ordinateur par les juridictions françaises (The Assessment of the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions by the French Courts), SSRN Electronic Journal, p.40, 2019.

. Ca-paris and . Order, BGH, Urteil v. 26. 10. 2018 ? V ZR 143/17 (LG Augsburg)., JuristenZeitung, vol.74, issue.17, p.840, 2019.

C. Izambert, La régularité du séjour des étrangers en France : frontière du projet d?universalisation de la protection sociale ?, Revue française des affaires sociales, vol.1, issue.4, p.17, 2018.

. Olg-düsseldorf, Sisvel v Haier, aff'd n°I-15 U 66/15, 2017.

J. C. Kathuria and . Lai, ROYALTY RATES FOR LICENSING, Intellectual Property, pp.237-271, 2018.

J. Strath-(paralegal) and K. Cameron-(partner), IPEC holds wedding dress designs infringed: no happy-ever-after for ex-employees, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, vol.13, issue.5, pp.350-353, 2018.