|
| |
The BURDICK LAW FIRM
© 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001,
2002, 2003, 2004 Bruce E. Burdick, JD
St. Louis, Missouri

PATENT INFRINGEMENT 101 (an
outline)
A patent can be infringed in several ways:
 |
Direct Infringement (the accused party makes, uses or sells an
infringing item.) |
 |
Contributory Infringement (the accused party was aiding or
abetting infringement);
 | Providing manufacturing equipment specially known to be designed to
produce infringing product; |
 | Producing a portion of the patented invention which has no significant
non-infringing use; or |
 | Deliberately facilitating production of a patented invention .
|
|
 |
Inducing Infringement (the accused party was luring others into
infringement); |
 |
Imputed Infringement (the accused party did something the law
implies to be infringement)
 | Importing, selling or using a product made abroad through a process
which would have infringed a US process patent if made in the USA; or
|
 | Manufacturing or selling certain components of a patented invention to
be assembled abroad. |
|
DEFENSES to Infringement
There are several defenses to a claim of patent infringement.
 |
Non-Infringement (Not covered by claims of patent)
 |
Experimental Use (An exception to infringement because people should
be encouraged to improve on patented inventions) |
 |
No literal
infringement (The accused device does not have all the identical
elements of the patent claims.) |
 |
No infringement under doctrine of equivalents
(The accused device has the same means, way and result as the
claimed invention.)
 | File wrapper estoppel (Something was said to or by the United States
Patent and Trademark Office that limits the claim.) |
 | Dedication (The accused invention was disclosed but not claimed.)
|
 | Separate Patentability (The accused device is patented, indicating it
my well be different enough not to infringe.) |
|
|
 |
Invalidity (Patent should not have been granted.)
 |
Anticipation (because the identical invention was already public)
|
 |
Obviousness (because the invention was obvious from what the public
already knew) |
 |
Inequitable Conduct (because fraud was committed on the Patent
Office) |
 |
Antitrust Violations (because the patent was misused ) |
|
 |
De Minimis (no damages - or minimal damages not worth
litigating - a practical rather than legal defense)
 |
Experimental use |
|
|