Category Archives: Divided Infringement

Subscribe to Divided Infringement RSS Feed

The Importance of Contracts for Joint Infringement in Patent Cases

It has been about a year since the Supreme Court rendered its decision in Limelight v. Akamai regarding induced infringement for methods performed by two or more actors. At that time, commentators predicted that attention would shift to contract analysis for determining direct, rather than induced, infringement in these multi-actor method situations, known as joint or divided infringement.  … Continue reading this entry

After the Supreme Court's Limelight Decision, Attention May Shift to Contract Analysis in Patent Cases

In Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Tech., Inc., the Supreme Court unanimously held that there can be no liability for induced infringement of a patented method where the steps of the method are carried out by separate actors. Yet, only one week later, the district court in Digital Reg of Tex., LLC v. Adobe Sys., … Continue reading this entry

Supreme Court Reinstates Induced Infringement Standard

Today the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs., Inc., No. 12-786, which was previously discussed here.  In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Alito, the Supreme Court reinstated the prior standard for induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), holding that a party may not be liable for inducing … Continue reading this entry

Supreme Court Hears Argument in Limelight v. Akamai

The Supreme Court heard argument yesterday in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs., Inc., which concerns the standard for inducing patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271(b). For those who have not followed (or don’t recall) the case’s long and winding road to the Supreme Court, the plaintiff Akamai alleged infringement of method claims directed at … Continue reading this entry

Good Faith Belief of Invalidity May Be Defense to Induced Infringement and Opinion Letters May Become Increasingly Important

The Federal Circuit recently denied a request for rehearing en banc in the matter of Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc., in a 6-5 vote of the participating judges.  2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 21713 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 25, 2013) (“Commil II”).  The result is that evidence of a good faith belief of invalidity of … Continue reading this entry