A company must be strategic in any business decision it makes in order to ensure that it takes the necessary measures to avoid liability for its actions. With respect to patent infringement, and specifically willful patent infringement, the different approaches to determining which measures to take and when to take such measures have been repeatedly challenged in light of a number of court decisions in recent years. To set the scene, the Federal Circuit held in Underwater Devices Inc. v. Morrison-Knudsen Co., 717 F.2d 1380 (1983) that a potential infringer has an affirmative duty to exercise due care to determine whether or not he or she is infringing. This placed the burden on the potential infringer to seek competent counsel and obtain either a non-infringement opinion or invalidity opinion prior to undertaking the possible infringing activities. This would prevent a finding of willful infringement and treble damages.
Recent Posts
- CAFC Affirms TTAB Ruling that FIREBALL is Not Generic but Competitor’s Mark Won’t Confuse
- John Squires Becomes Official Nominee to Head USPTO
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, March 7: Lashify Wins ITC Appeal on Economic Prong Analysis; CAFC Says Apple Did Not Violate Discovery Obligations at PTAB; and ParkerVision Files Reply Brief on Rule 36 Appeal at SCOTUS
- Rio Tinto is Seeking an IP Counsel Innovation & Technology
- Moderna COVID Vaccine Technology Struck Down by PTAB