Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The Intellectual Property StrategistKickerFeaturesTopicsCommercial LawLitigationSectionsNewsLJN Newsletters

Boundaries of Patent Exhaustion Defense Explored, Decided (For Now) In <i>En Banc Lexmark</i> Decision

By David Tellekson, Phil Decker and Stefan Szpajda
April 01, 2016

Despite over 150 years of Supreme Court precedent, even the most basic precepts of patent exhaustion doctrine remain unsettled. In Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Impression Prods., Inc., No. 2014-1617 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 12, 2016) (en banc), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit grappled with the very foundations of the so-called “first sale” defense in deciding that: 1) a patent owner's sale of an article abroad does not exhaust its U.S. patent rights; and 2) post-sale use restrictions imposed at the point of sale can preserve the patent owner's right to sue downstream users when those restrictions are violated.

Lexmark attracted enormous attention from amicus curiae. In the over 30 briefs submitted to the Federal Circuit, there was a clear demarcation along industry lines. Biotechnology and life sciences companies urged the court to maintain its limited exhaustion rules to permit price differentiation practices that benefit consumers who do not want, and cannot afford, the full bundle of rights associated with a patented product. Computer and high technology companies, in contrast, generally urged adoption of a broader exhaustion rule to ensure freer flow of component parts at every level of their international supply and distribution chains.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later Image

The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.

Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations Image

This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.

The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs Image

The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.

CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys Image

Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.

Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing Image

A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.