Life Technologies Corp v. Promega Corp, U.S. No. 14-1538, amicus brief filed 9/8/2016
Patent infringement liability under 35 U.S.C. §271(f)(1) for supplying a “substantial portion of the components” of the invention may be established by supplying a single component that is crucially important to a multi-component invention, AIPLA argued to the Supreme Court in a brief filed September 8, 2016.
According to the brief, a quantitative-only approach to § 271(f)(1) could not only create liability for an accused infringer who supplies multiple but relatively unimportant components, but could also excuse one who supplies a single, “substantial,” and indispensable component. While the statutory language and legislative history support a primarily qualitative analysis, the number of supplied components may well be an important consideration. However, the determination of whether supplied component(s) are a “substantial portion of the components of a patented invention” should be assessed based on the importance of the supplied components to the overall invention as determined by considering the disclosure of the specification.
According to the brief, a quantitative-only approach to § 271(f)(1) could not only create liability for an accused infringer who supplies multiple but relatively unimportant components, but could also excuse one who supplies a single, “substantial,” and indispensable component. While the statutory language and legislative history support a primarily qualitative analysis, the number of supplied components may well be an important consideration. However, the determination of whether supplied component(s) are a “substantial portion of the components of a patented invention” should be assessed based on the importance of the supplied components to the overall invention as determined by considering the disclosure of the specification.