Judge Fitzwater’s denial of the motion to dismiss found that the claims of direct and indirect infringement are supported by the following pertinent facts alleged in the amended complaint:

• Direct Infringement –
  • Defendant produces and sells using an infringing method (the Court noted the method was fully described in the complaint);
  • Defendant either uses or directs, controls, or instructs a third party who uses every element of the infringing method;
  • Defendant describes and advertises the accused method on its website; and
  • Defendant has actual knowledge of the patent at issue.

• Inducement of Infringement –
  • Defendant uses or sells methods claimed in the patent at issue in the accused application or directs or controls third parties who perform the claimed method; and
  • Defendant has actual knowledge of the patent at issue and continued to sell its infringing application willfully.

• Contributory Infringement –
  • Defendant sells a product, method, or system that is a component designed for use in the infringing manner; and
  • Defendant has sold software tools and instructions to aid in the use of the application.

Email this original Klemchuk Kubasta LLP article to your associates.

©2012 Snipe Hunting in the NDTX. All Rights Reserved.