The Supreme Court increased patent indirect infringement liabilities for companies that make and sell some but not all of the components of the patented product here in the United States and then assemble the patented product overseas. For example, if a competitor makes more than one but not all of the components of the patented product here in the United States, a patent owner … [Read more...]
Indirect infringement
Indirect infringement of a patent occurs when an entity induces another to directly infringe a patent or contributes to the direct infringement of another. 35 U.S.C. §§271(b) and (c).
Browse related articles below.
Active inducement of infringement in physician patient relationships
Background In Eli Lilly v. Teva (Fed. Cir. 2017), the patent owner (Eli Lilly) sued Teva under a theory of active inducement of infringement. In particular, the patent owner asserted that Teva induced others to infringe Eli Lilly’s patent (U.S. Pat. No. 7,772,209). Teva was not accused of directly infringing the patent itself, but instead was accused of indirectly infringing … [Read more...]
Claim drafting tip: Focus on direct, not indirect infringement
Bottom line: The claims of a patent should, if possible, be specifically and separately directed to each one of several entities within a distribution chain such as the end user, supplier, component supplier, or manufacturer so that each of these entities can be held liable for direct patent infringement. This may be difficult and not possible to accomplish but it should be a … [Read more...]
SCOTUS reduces liability for indirect patent infringement
The scope of patent protection of a patent is defined by the claims. Ideally, the claims should be written in a variety of ways so that different entities along the distribution channel can be identified as direct infringers. These entities include manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and end users. Each one of these entities may be sued for patent infringement, but … [Read more...]
New non-infringement defense to inducement of patent infringement
Federal Circuit creates a new defense to inducement of patent infringement In Commil v Cisco (Fed. Cir. June 25, 2013), the patent owner sued the alleged infringer for inducement of patent infringement. This occurs when a third party may not necessarily be infringing the patent but is encouraging another to infringe the patent. To prove inducement of infringement, the patent … [Read more...]
Patent exhaustion doctrine works against Keurig’s business
Judge rules that Keurig can’t lock up the single-use coffee cartridge market Keurig has a number of patents directed to its single self serve coffee makers. These patents cover the coffee maker and the method of using the coffee maker. Keurig makes a profit from both the sale of the coffee maker but also from the repeat business of consumers that buy its single-use coffee … [Read more...]
Expanding value of opinion of patent counsel
An opinion of patent counsel regarding patent infringement is relevant to the intent of an alleged infringer and may be useful to mitigate trebling of damages. This case expands the value of opinion of counsel to also mitigate liability for inducement of infringement. Patent infringement may be found through direct infringement. This occurs when a person personally makes, … [Read more...]
New standard for active inducement of patent infringement
Method claims have just become more valuable. The reason is that the Federal Circuit has broadened its scope of protection. Background information Under prior patent law, infringement of a method claim could be found through either direct infringement or indirect infringement. Direct infringement of a method claim occurs when a single actor (i.e., person or entity) performs … [Read more...]