Supreme Court to Reexamine the Interplay Between Patents and Unlawful Tying Agreements
The Supreme Court has decided today to hear Illinois Tool Works v. Independent Ink (04-1329).
In this case, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that a rebuttable presumption of market power sufficient to restrain trade under antitrust law arises from the patentee’s possession of a patent used in an explicit tying agreement.
The suit involves an ink jet device patented by Trident, a subsidiary of Illinois Tool Works. Independent Ink manufactures unpatented ink that is usable in Trident’s patented device. However, Trident’s license/purchase agreements require use of Trident’s ink under certain circumstances.
Independent Ink sued alleging an illegal tying arrangement in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The district court dismissed the claim on summary judgment, but the CAFC reversed — ordering the lower court to presume market power based on the patent tying agreement.
In its opinion, the CAFC admonished the district court for not following clearly established Supreme Court precedent and for dismissing the High Court's holdings as “vintage.” The appellate panel noted that, although it may be time to abandon the doctrine, it is up to the Supreme Court or Congress to expressly overrule its own precedent -- this prerogative does not lie with the district courts. The High Court is expected to hear the case next fall.
Amicus briefs in the petition were filed by the AIPLA, ABA, Pfizer, and the IPO.
Link:
Comments