SCOTUS Patent Scorecard Update: Patent Owners Plate A Run

On May 26, 2015, the Supreme Court deviated from its recent anti-patent bias. Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. is a mildly surprising, pro-patent decision that eliminates a defense to induced patent infringement.

The Court specifically addressed whether a defendant’s belief that a patent claim is invalid is a defense to a charge of induced infringement. The Court held that such a belief is not a defense, and that is because the scienter (knowledge) element for induced infringement concerns infringement and infringement and validity are distinct issues. Put another way, allowing a belief in invalidity to negate the scienter requirement for induced infringement would significantly undermine the presumption that a patent claim is valid. Here’s how: a defendant charged with induced infringement could swap the very high, clear and convincing invalidity standard for the lower, more likely than not belief in invalidity standard. The Supreme Court deemed such a scenario unacceptable.

Going forward, will the Supreme Court’s endorsement of the presumption of validity motivate modifications to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s approach to invalidity?