Menu
U.S. Supreme Court: Burden of proof of infringement on patent holder

U.S. Supreme Court: Burden of proof of infringement on patent holder

The top U.S. court was ruling in an appeal by a medical devices maker

The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld that it is up to the patent holder ordinarily to prove infringement in a lawsuit, a ruling that could have vast implications on the litigious technology industry.

The lawsuit traces its origin to a patent dispute between medical devices maker Medtronic and patent holder Mirowski Family Ventures. Medtronic, which was a licensee of Mirowski since 1991 through its sub-licensee, asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware in 2007 for a declaratory judgment that its new products did not infringe Mirowski's patents and that the patents were invalid.

A patentee ordinarily bears the burden of proving infringement, Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote, while delivering the opinion of the Supreme Court. "This case asks us to decide whether the burden of proof shifts when the patentee is a defendant in a declaratory judgment action, and the plaintiff (the potential infringer) seeks a judgment that he does not infringe the patent."

Mirowski had given Medtronic notice that it believed seven new Medtronic products violated various claims contained in two of its patents. The patents were related to devices that cause the heart's ventricles to contract simultaneously as the heart beats. As provided by an earlier agreement with Mirowski, Medtronic paid all the relevant royalties into an escrow account when filing the lawsuit.

The court in Delaware ruled that it was up to Mirowski to prove infringement, and after a bench trial found that Mirowski had not proved infringement. The decision was over-ruled by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which said it was up to Medtronic to prove its case, as it bore the "burden of persuasion."

The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the decision of the district court, stating that it holds that "when a licensee seeks a declaratory judgment against a patentee to establish that there is no infringement, the burden of proving infringement remains with the patentee."

Follow Us

Join the New Zealand Reseller News newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags intellectual propertypatentlegalMirowski Family VenturesMedtronicU.S. Supreme Court

Featured

Slideshows

Kiwi channel reunites as After Hours kicks off 2017

Kiwi channel reunites as After Hours kicks off 2017

After Hours made a welcome return to the channel social calendar last night, with a bumper crowd of distributors, vendors and resellers descending on The Jefferson in Auckland to kickstart 2017. Photos by Maria Stefina.

Kiwi channel reunites as After Hours kicks off 2017
Arrow exclusively introduces Tenable Network Security to A/NZ channel

Arrow exclusively introduces Tenable Network Security to A/NZ channel

Arrow Electronics introduced Tenable Network Security to local resellers in Sydney last week, officially launching the distributor's latest security partnership across Australia and New Zealand. Representing the first direct distribution agreement locally for Tenable specifically, the deal sees Arrow deliver security solutions directly to mid-market and enterprise channel partners on both sides of the Tasman.

Arrow exclusively introduces Tenable Network Security to A/NZ channel
Examining the changing job scene in the Kiwi channel

Examining the changing job scene in the Kiwi channel

Typically, the New Year brings new opportunities for personnel within the Kiwi channel. 2017 started no differently, with a host of appointments, departures and reshuffles across vendor, distributor and reseller businesses. As a result, the job scene across New Zealand has changed - here’s a run down of who is working where in the year ahead…

Examining the changing job scene in the Kiwi channel
Show Comments