Indirect Patent Infringement And Global-Tech

On May 31, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Federal Circuit's application of its "deliberate indifference" test in SEB S.A. v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 594 F.3d 1360 (2010), was inappropriate to establish the knowledge required for inducement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b), but that a defendant's "willful blindness" could, alternatively, be used to satisfy this knowledge requirement.

Background of the Global-Tech decision

Inducement is a theory of indirect patent infringement. 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) provides that "[w]hoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer." To establish active inducement, a plaintiff must generally show that: (1) a direct infringement occurred, (2) the defendant's actions induced this direct infringement, and (3) the defendant had a specific intent to induce infringement.¹