Law360, New York (January 29, 2007, 12:00 AM ET) -- On December 13, 2006, in DSU Medical Corp. v. JMS Co., 04-1620, 05-1048, -1052 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 13, 2006), the en banc Federal Circuit resolved “conflicting precedent” and unambiguously announced that liability under 35 U.S.C. §271(b) for inducement requires a “specific intent to infringe,” and not merely an intent to induce the acts that are later charged with infringement.
This decision alters conventional wisdom and further increases the value of opinions of counsel.
Despite suggestions in earlier Federal Circuit and district court case law, until now...
Opinion-Of-Counsel Defense To Inducement
To view the full article, take a free trial now.
