ARTICLE
17 September 2013

Defending Wilful Patent Infringement In 2013

W
WilmerHale

Contributor

WilmerHale provides legal representation across a comprehensive range of practice areas critical to the success of its clients. With a staunch commitment to public service, the firm is a leader in pro bono representation. WilmerHale is 1,000 lawyers strong with 12 offices in the United States, Europe and Asia.
The potential threat of treble damages and attorney fees awards for wilful patent infringement has always been a significant concern for companies accused of patent infringement, particularly since the willfullness determination was generally viewed as a factual question to be submitted to the jury.
United States Intellectual Property

Originally published by the Los Angeles & San Francisco Daily Journal, July 23, 2013

The potential threat of treble damages and attorney fees awards for wilful patent infringement has always been a significant concern for companies accused of patent infringement, particularly since the willfullness determination was generally viewed as a factual question to be submitted to the jury.

The Federal Circuit's en banc decision last year in Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. v. W.I. Gore & Assocs., Inc., however, significantly altered the litigation landscape for such claims. It held that the objective prong of the wilfulness standard ― whether the accused infringer acted despite and objectively high likelihood that its action constituted infringement of a valid patent ― is a question of law for the judge, not the jury.

Please click here to view the full text of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More