Chapter 17 Outline

• Jurisdiction: United States

Chapter 17

Indirect Infringement

§17.01 Introduction

§17.02 Inducing Infringement Under §271(b)

[A] Acts

[1] Sale of Product Needed to Infringe

[2] Provide Instructions, Directions, or Guidance

[3] Corporate Officer Liability

[4] Generic Pharmaceutical Labeling

[a] General Principles

[b] Inducement Found: AstraZeneca v. Apotex (2011)

[c] Inducement Not Found: Takeda v. West-Ward (2015)

[d] GlaxoSmithKline v. Teva (2020-2021)

[i] Facts

[ii] GlaxoSmithKline v. Teva (October 2020), Decision Vacated

[iii] GlaxoSmithKline v. Teva (2021)

[B] Relationship Between Inducing and Direct Infringement

[1] Generally

[2] Proving Direct Infringement

[C] Intent Standard for Inducing Infringement

[1] Pre-2011 Federal Circuit Decisions

[a] Knowledge of the Patent Requirement; Rejected "Deliberate Disregard" Standard

[b] Good Faith Belief of Invalidity

[i] Commil I (Fed. Cir. 2013)

[ii] Commil II (Fed. Cir. 2013) ( en banc)

[2] Supreme Court Decisions

[a] "Willful Blindness" Standard: Global-Tech (U.S. 2011)

[b] Good Faith Belief of Invalidity Rejected as Defense: Commil III (U.S. 2015)

[3] Federal Circuit Application of Global-Tech and Commil III

[D] Rejection of Inducing Liability for Divided Infringement

[1] Introduction

[2] Akamai II (Fed. Cir. 2012) ( en banc)

[3] Akamai III (U.S. 2014)

[E] Pleading Inducing Infringement

§17.03 Contributory Infringement Under §271(c)

[A] Acts

[1] Supply Component

[2] Supply Material or Apparatus

[3] Repair Versus Reconstruction

[B] Non-Staple Article or Commodity of Commerce

[C] Intent Standard for Contributory Infringement

[D] Pleading Contributory Infringement

[E] Relationship to Patent Misuse