context: According to Defendants, Dr. Liu's employment agreement constitutes an "automatic" assignment that, upon conception, immediately assigned his inventions to the University of Washington with no further required action on his part.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 601 F.3d 1319, 1326
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that the contractual language "employee assigns [his inventions]" has the effect of "expressly granting] rights with no further action needed on the part of the employee[ ]"
citation_a.sentence: See Speedplay, Inc. v. Bebop, Inc., 211 F.3d 1245, 1253 (Fed.Cir.2000) (holding agreement stating inventions' “shall belong,” and that employee “hereby conveys, transfers and assigns” to its employer, constitutes an automatic assignment); see also SiRF Tech., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 601 F.3d 1319, 1326 (Fed.Cir.2010) (holding that the contractual language “employee assigns [his inventions]” has the effect of “expressly granting] rights with no further action needed on the part of the employee[ ]”). '
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 211 F.3d 1245, 1253
citation_b.parenthetical: holding agreement stating inventions' "shall belong," and that employee "hereby conveys, transfers and assigns" to its employer, constitutes an automatic assignment
citation_b.sentence: See Speedplay, Inc. v. Bebop, Inc., 211 F.3d 1245, 1253 (Fed.Cir.2000) (holding agreement stating inventions' “shall belong,” and that employee “hereby conveys, transfers and assigns” to its employer, constitutes an automatic assignment); see also SiRF Tech., Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 601 F.3d 1319, 1326 (Fed.Cir.2010) (holding that the contractual language “employee assigns [his inventions]” has the effect of “expressly granting] rights with no further action needed on the part of the employee[ ]”). '