Private Law Theory

ABSTRACT
In Collision Communications v Samsung Electronics, the patentee advances an originalist equity argument that 18th-century Chancery practice mandates a presumption of irreparable harm for ongoing patent infringement, potentially reversing two decades of post-eBay precedent limiting injunctions for non-practicing entities. The argument draws on Trump v CASA‘s holding that federal equity encompasses only remedies traditionally accorded by courts of equity in 1789, combined with historical scholarship by Gómez-Arostegui and Bottomley documenting that Chancery treated ongoing patent infringement as per se irreparable harm. The DOJ and USPTO filed their third Statement of Interest in eight months supporting NPE injunctive relief, though declining to endorse the categorical rule Collision advocates. This article examines whether the Supreme Court’s commitment to historical equity principles will extend to patent injunctions.

Crouch, Dennis D, Intitled to Tie Him Up: Can 18th-Century Chancery Practice Restore Patent Injunctions? (March 13, 2026), University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No 2026-28; Patently-O (March 2, 2026).