PTO Joins DOJ in Supporting Injunctions for Standard-Essential Patents
The government's decision to withdraw 2013 policy guidance will please patent holders but likely upset tech companies, auto makers and ISPs who had urged PTO to stay the course.
December 23, 2019 at 10:56 AM
3 minute read
The USPTO has signed onto the Justice Department's rollback of guidance for standard-essential patents.
Seven years ago, DOJ's Antitrust Division and the PTO issued a policy statement advising the International Trade Commission that the public interest may preclude exclusion orders when patent holders have committed to license SEPs on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms and implementers are willing to negotiate in good faith.
"In an era where competition and consumer welfare thrive on interconnected, interoperable network platforms, the DOJ and USPTO urge the USITC to consider whether a patent holder has acknowledged voluntarily through a commitment to license its patents on F/RAND terms that money damages, rather than injunctive or exclusionary relief, is the appropriate remedy for infringement," the 2013 guidance stated.
Antitrust division chief Makan Delrahim disavowed that guidance a year ago, and on Friday the DOJ and PTO formally withdrew it. "In the years since the 2013 policy statement issued," the agencies have heard concerns that "it's been misinterpreted to suggest that a unique set of legal rules should be applied in disputes concerning patents subject to a F/RAND commitment," the new guidance states.
"Consistent with the prevailing law and depending on the facts and forum, the remedies that may apply in a given patent case include injunctive relief, reasonable royalties, lost profits, enhanced damages for willful infringement, and exclusion orders issued by the U.S. International Trade Commission," the guidance states. "These remedies are equally available in patent litigation involving standards-essential patents."
The guidance is signed by Delrahim, PTO Director Andrei Iancu and Walter Copan, director of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology. NIST had no joined the 2013 guidance.
Patent owners had argued that with exclusion orders or injunctions effectively off the table, implementers often felt free to infringe their technology and snub even reasonable license offers.
Iancu's decision will surely disappoint Apple Inc., Cisco Systems Inc., Ford Motor Co., Comcast and about two dozen other stakeholders who wrote to Iancu and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross in April, urging them not to sign on. "The unwarranted availability of exclusionary remedies inherently provides SEP owners the leverage to appropriate value that may be unrelated to their invention," they argued, especially once a standard becomes established and switching to another is too difficult or expensive.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllEPA grants California authority to ban sales of new gas cars by 2035. Action faces reversal by Trump
Auto Dealer Software Upstart Accuses Entrenched Competitor of 'Attempted Monopolization'
4 minute readElon Musk Has a Lot More Than a 'Tornetta' Appeal to Resolve in Del. Court
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Split 4th Circuit Revives Constitutional Challenge to Child Vaccine Mandate
- 2Lack of Available Auto Safety Features Does Not Equal Products Liability Act Violation, NJ Appeals Court Says
- 3Riding High, Texas Roadhouse Gives Legal Chief 3-year Contract Extension,15% Salary Boost
- 4New York Times Moves for $100K in Attorney Fees Against Dfinity Foundation
- 5Few Atlanta-Centric Law Firms Expected to Pay Associate Bonuses at Market Scale
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250