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