U.S. Supreme Court to Decide: Will
Patent Infringers Continue to Be Routinely Enjoined?
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether a permanent
injunction should ordinarily issue after a patent is found valid and
infringed. A decision in the case — eBay Inc. et al. v. MercExchange,
L.L.C. — is expected by July 2006.
At trial, a jury ruled for MercExchange, holding that eBay and its
subsidiary, Half.com, infringed two patents; but the trial court refused
MercExchange's request for a permanent injunction against the infringers.
The trial court based its refusal on what it called a growing concern
over the issuance of business-method patents; concerns that design-arounds
by the infringers could result in repeated questions about whether
infringement was continuing; public statements that MercExchange was
willing to license its patents; and MercExchange's failure to ask
for a preliminary injunction. Rejecting these bases on appeal, the
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the validity and infringement
of one of MercExchange's patents, but ruled that the trial court's
denial of the injunction was improper because of the general rule
that, absent exceptional circumstances such as issues of public health
or safety, courts will issue permanent injunctions against adjudged
infringers.
eBay petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the question whether
the general rule in patent cases is proper, arguing that it is contrary
to the applicable statute and to standards usually applied in other
areas of law when an injunction is sought. On November 28, 2005 the
Supreme Court not only granted eBay's petition on the question it
presented, the Court also took the unusual step of posing as an additional
question whether one of its earlier decisions on injunctions in patent
cases — the nearly 100-year-old case of Continental Paper Bag
Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co. — should be reconsidered.
Of course, should the U.S. Supreme Court do away with the long-recognized
rule that permanent injunctions will usually be entered against adjudged
infringers, patent enforcement in the U.S. could be seriously affected.
A number of friend-of-the-court briefs had already been filed while
the petition for review was pending, and this will likely be repeated
now that the Supreme Court has agreed to take a case that U.S. patent
lawyers will be watching very closely.