85.6
October
2018

Print
Comment
85.6
Not So Different after All: The Status of Interpretive Rules in the Medicare Act
Graham Haviland
BA 2011, The University of Chicago; JD Candidate 2019, The University of Chicago Law School

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) distinguishes between “legislative rules” that bind with the force of law and “interpretive rules” that merely interpret existing statutes or rules.

Print
Comment
85.6
i4i Makes the Patent World Blind
Michael J. Conway
BA 2014, Loyola University Chicago; JD Candidate 2019, The University of Chicago Law School

A patent does not magically ensure that an inventor receives the twenty-year personal monopoly to which she is entitled over the personal and commercial use of her invention. To maximize a patent’s value, the patent holder must diligently enforce the patent in federal court against infringers.

Print
Comment
85.6
Defining “Second or Successive” Habeas Petitions after Magwood
Megan Volin
BA and BS 2016, Northern Arizona University; JD Candidate 2019, The University of Chicago Law School

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) governs the filing and adjudication of federal habeas corpus petitions.

Print
Article
85.6
Relational Contracts of Adhesion
David A. Hoffman
Professor of Law, University of Pennsylvania Law School

I would like to thank the individuals who agreed to be interviewed for this article: Hissan Bajwa, Michal Rosenn, Bonnie Broeren, Rob Chesnut, Eric Goldman, Jay Monahan, Ari Shahdadi, Curtis Anderson, Ed Ferguson, Michael Cheah, Hansen Tong, and Miranda Lerner. Katherine Schloss Ackerman (Penn ’17), Elyssa Eisenberg (Penn ’18), and Michelle Kao (Penn ’18) provided research assistance. Tom Baker, Shyam Balganesh, Danielle Citron, Zev Eigen, Meirav Furth-Matzkin, Eric Goldman, Ethan Leib, Sophia Lee, Greg Klass, Florencia Marotta-Wurgler, Melanie McMenamin, Lior Strahilevitz, Rick Swedloff, Michael Risch, Tess Wilkinson-Ryan, David Wishnick, and participants at faculty workshops at the University of Pennsylvania, Boston University, UC Hastings, Villanova University, University of Chicago, and the Second Empirical Contracts Working Group provided useful feedback.

Consumer contract theory is myopically focused on the unread fine print. Because consumers don’t read their contracts, firms can make “hidden” terms worse without lowering prices.

Print
Article
85.6
A New Market-Based Approach to Securities Law
Kevin S. Haeberle
Associate Professor of Law, William & Mary Law School
M. Todd Henderson
Michael J. Marks Professor of Law and Mark Claster Mamolen Research Scholar, University of Chicago Law School

Many scholars have proposed market-based solutions to the well-known shortcomings of modern securities law.

Volumes