Abstract

The Federal Circuit decision in Seagate represented a sea change in patent law on the issue of willfulness. In the generation of case law from Underwater Devices to Seagate, the Court held that alleged patent infringers had a duty of care to obtain an opinion of counsel as a rebuttal to the belief that an infringed patent was invalid and not infringed. The Seagate Court overruled the need for a duty of care and instituted an “objectively reckless” standard for willful infringement that represented a high bar for proof. The Seagate Court erred in several ways in changing the willfulness standards. Further, the Court failed to provide a meaningful interpretation of recklessness. The consequences of these errors are to severely constrain the willfulness standard and its deterrence effect to balance patentee rights.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.