Federal Circuit Finds Evidence of Infringement, Willfulness, and Damages Insufficient as a Matter of Law
Highlights
In Provisur Technologies, Inc. v. Weber, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the plaintiff’s proof of infringement for one patent was insufficient as a matter of law where it was undisputed that the accused device did not meet one limitation and was not reasonably capable of doing so
Testimony that the defendant had failed to consult a third party was contrary to Section 298 of the Patent Code and inadmissible. The remaining evidence of willfulness was insufficient
The court also found the plaintiff’s damages proof insufficient because it was based on the entire market value rule, but the plaintiff offered no evidence that the patented features were the basis of customer demand
In Provisur Technologies, Inc. v. Weber, Inc., the Federal Circuit considered challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence of infringement for one patent and of damages overall. The court found the evidence of infringement wanting where the accused device indisputably did not meet, and was not “reasonably capable” of being modified to meet, one claim limitation. The damages proof was also insufficient because the plaintiff relied on the entire market value rule but presented no evidence that the patented feature was the basis for customer demand for the accused product.
Keep Up to Date in a Changing World
