Monthly Archives: March 2010

Washington Court Publicly Criticizes Poor Writing

You have failed to communicate when a court writes this about you: We have considered the possibility of rejecting Stongard’s appeal solely on the basis that the violations of the Rules of Appellate Procedure make Stongard’s argument too difficult to follow. But we have elected to conduct review on the merits because it appears that […]

Read More

Patent Liability for Corporate Officers – Part 4 of 4

Last, but not least, courts can find that corporate officers have induced patent infringement pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) independently of the other grounds of liability. In relevant part, 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) states whoever “actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer.” Induced infringement requires (1) that the company […]

Read More

Patent Liability for Corporate Officers – Part 3 of 4

A corporate officer may be found by a court to directly infringe a patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) which states in pertinent part, “whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention” in the U.S. or imports into the U.S. any patented invention “during the term of the patent therefor, […]

Read More

Patent Liability for Corporate Officers – Part 2 of 4

A patentee may show that “equity” or fairness also demands holding a corporate officer liable for for a corporation’s acts of patent infringement. Bangor Punta Operations, Inc. v. Bangor & A.R. Co., 417 U.S. 703, 713 (1974). Although a corporation and its shareholders are deemed separate entities for most purposes, the corporate form may be […]

Read More