United States: Supreme Court Rules That Any Authorized Product Sale, Anywhere In The World, Exhausts Patent Rights

The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a patent owner's sale of a patented product exhausts its ability to bring infringement claims against the purchaser, or subsequent owners, of the product. In so holding, the Court rejected cases, such as Mallinckrodt, Inc. v. Medipart, Inc., 976 F.2d 700 (1992), which recognized contractual limitations on a purchaser's post-sale use or disposal of a product. In addition, the Court held that product sales in a foreign country trigger exhaustion, even when the product sold was not subject to patent protection in the place of sale. Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Int'l, Inc., No. 15-1189 (U.S. May 30, 2017). So, for example, if a U.S. patent owner sells a product covered by its U.S. patent in Germany, the product sold in Germany could be imported into the U.S. without infringing (the U.S. patent) because all rights by the patent owner would have already been exhausted by the sale in Germany. The decision is likely to expand the exhaustion doctrine as a hurdle to patent enforcement, and will likely cause patent owners to reevaluate their product sales and distribution strategies. Tempering the impact somewhat, the Court stated that contractual provisions may be used to control downstream uses of patented products.


The Court's decision is the latest in a long-running litigation between Lexmark International. Inc., a maker of computer printers, and Impression Products, Inc., which refurbishes and resells used printer toner cartridges. Lexmark sells toner cartridges both in the U.S. and in foreign markets. In the U.S., Lexmark sells cartridges in two configurations. First, Lexmark sells cartridges at full price with no restrictions on the purchaser's ability to refill and reuse the cartridges. Second, Lexmark sells its toner cartridges at a discount and the purchaser agrees to refrain from transferring spent cartridges to any person other than Lexmark (also called the Lexmark "Return Program"). All cartridge sales outside the U.S. were made without restriction on purchaser disposition of spent cartridges. In the litigation, Lexmark alleged that Impression infringed its patents by taking title to used toner cartridges, circumventing microchip technology intended to prevent refilling the cartridges, and reselling the refurbished cartridges in the United States (including importing cartridges from foreign markets).

Impression defended the infringement, arguing that the initial sales of Lexmark toner cartridges exhausted all patent rights, and thus the original purchasers and any downstream owners of the cartridges were free from infringement claims. The Federal Circuit held that patent exhaustion did not apply to either the domestic "Return Program" cartridges or the foreign-sale cartridges. Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Int'l, Inc., 816 F. 3d 721 (2016).

Supreme Court Ruling:

In a decision written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and ruled that patent exhaustion applies both to "Return Program" cartridges in the U.S. and to cartridges sold outside the U.S.

First, the Court held that patent exhaustion occurs automatically whenever a patent owner sells a patented product. "When a patentee chooses to sell an item, that product 'is no longer within the limits of the monopoly' and instead becomes the 'private, individual property' of the purchaser, with the rights and benefits that come along with ownership." Slip op. at 6, quoting Bloomer v. McQuewan, 14 How. 539 (1853). The Court noted that the principle of exhaustion had an "impressive historical pedigree[.]" "As Lord Coke put it in the 17th century, if an owner restricts the resale or use of an item after selling it, that restriction 'is voide, because . . . it is against Trade and Traffique, and bargaining and contracting betweene man and man.'" Slip op. at 6-7, quoting 1 E. Coke, Institutes of the Laws of England §360, p. 223 (1628).

Further, the Court held that express restrictions on the purchaser's right to use the patented product do not prevent exhaustion. Those restrictions may be enforceable under contract principles, but they do not preserve the right to bring a patent infringement claim. Relying on prior decisions finding exhaustion, including United States v. Univis Lens Co., 316 U. S. 241 (1942) and Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc., 553 U. S. 617 (2008), the Court concluded that sales of cartridges under the "Return Program" resulted in exhaustion of Lexmark's patents:

[W]e conclude that this well-settled line of precedent allows for only one answer: Lexmark cannot bring a patent infringement suit against Impression Products to enforce the single-use/no-resale provision accompanying its Return Program cartridges. Once sold, the Return Program cartridges passed outside of the patent monopoly, and whatever rights Lexmark retained are a matter of the contracts with its purchasers, not the patent law.

Slip op. at 9.

Exhaustion will also occur when a product is sold by a licensee with authority to make the sale. "That licensee's sale is treated, for purposes of patent exhaustion, as if the patentee made the sale itself." Slip op. at 12. The Court noted, however, that exhaustion will not generally arise where the patent owner licensed rights to practice under the patent, as opposed to selling a patented product:

A patentee can impose restrictions on licensees because a license does not implicate the same concerns about restraints on alienation as a sale. Patent exhaustion reflects the principle that, when an item passes into commerce, it should not be shaded by a legal cloud on title as it moves through the marketplace. But a license is not about passing title to a product, it is about changing the contours of the patentee's monopoly: The patentee agrees not to exclude a licensee from making or selling the patented invention, expanding the club of authorized producers and sellers. Because the patentee is exchanging rights, not goods, it is free to relinquish only a portion of its bundle of patent protections.

Slip op. at 11 (citation omitted).

Second, the Court held that exhaustion applies to the sale of patented products outside the U.S., as well as domestic sales. It rejected the rationale adopted by the Federal Circuit that exhaustion should not apply to foreign sales because the seller is unable to command a premium price to compensate for a release of patent rights when the product sold is not covered by the patent. On this point, the Court looked to the contours of copyright's first sale doctrine. See Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 568 U. S. 519 (2013). In the Kirtsaeng decision, one important factor supporting the Court's decision to apply the first sale doctrine to non-U.S. sales was "the fact that the first sale doctrine originated in 'the common law's refusal to permit restraints on the alienation of chattels.' That 'common-law doctrine makes no geographical distinctions.'" Slip op at 14. Applying a parallel reasoning, the Court ruled that patent exhaustion should apply to non-U.S. sales:

Patent exhaustion, too, has its roots in the antipathy toward restraints on alienation, and nothing in the text or history of the Patent Act shows that Congress intended to confine that borderless common law principle to domestic sales. In fact, Congress has not altered patent exhaustion at all; it remains an unwritten limit on the scope of the patentee's monopoly. And differentiating the patent exhaustion and copyright first sale doctrines would make little theoretical or practical sense: The two share a strong similarity and identity of purpose, and many everyday products —automobiles, microwaves, calculators, mobile phones, tablets, and personal computers — are subject to both patent and copyright protections. There is a "historic kinship between patent law and copyright law," Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U. S. 417, 439 (1984), and the bond between the two leaves no room for a rift on the question of international exhaustion."

Slip op. at 14-15 (quotations and citations omitted).

Thus, the Court further held:

[a]llowing patent rights to stick remora-like to that item as it flows through the market would violate the principle against restraints on alienation. Exhaustion does not depend on whether the patentee receives a premium for selling in the United States, or the type of rights that buyers expect to receive. As a result, restrictions and location are irrelevant; what matters is the patentee's decision to make a sale.

Slip op. at 18. Justice Ginsburg dissented from the ruling on this issue, arguing that exhaustion, like the first sale doctrine, should be limited to U.S. sales.

Practical Significance:

The Impressions decision is significant because it undercuts longstanding Federal Circuit law onwhich lower courts have relied upon to allow patent owners to sell products without losing the right to restrict post-sale activities. See Jazz Photo Corp. v. International Trade Commission, 264 F. 3d 1094 (2001) (holding that exhaustion does not apply to non-U.S. sales); and Mallinckrodt, Inc. v. Medipart, Inc., 976 F. 2d 700 (1992) (upholding post-sale restrictions on product use). The decision will force patent owners to review their current sales and distribution strategies, including any arrangements with licensees. The decision raises several issues that will be litigated in future cases.

For example, although the Court indicated that licenses typically will not result in exhaustion, it remains unclear whether standard, mass market licenses, such as those used in the distribution of computer software, will trigger exhaustion issues. In addition, the Court noted that restrictions on post-sale activity can be enforced as a breach of contract. Patent owners may consider bringing claims for interference with contract against competitors who encourage customers to breach their contractual obligations by transferring products in violation of purchase terms.

Disclosure: Brook Kushman P.C. represented parties adverse to Lexmark International, Inc and argued in favor of the exhaustion principles adopted by the Supreme Court.

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.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions