Decided
Halo Electronics Inc. v. Pulse Electronics Inc.
Consolidated with Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer Inc. (14-1520)
Holding
Section 284 of the Patent Act provides that, in a case of infringement, courts "may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed." Under the Federal Circuit's two-part Seagate test, damages may be increased under Section 284 only if the patent owner can show, by clear and convincing evidence, both that "the infringer acted despite an objectively high likelihood that its actions constituted infringement of a valid patent" and that the risk of infringement "was either known or so obvious that it should have been known to the accused infringer." The Seagate test is "unduly rigid" and not consistent with the text of Section 284.
Judgment
Vacated and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by John Roberts on Jun 13, 2016. Justice Breyer filed a concurring opinion, in which Justices Kennedy and Alito joined.
Related Coverage
Jun 22, 2015Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 24, 2015)
Jul 16, 2015Order extending time to file response to petition to and including August 24, 2015.
Jul 24, 2015Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Nokia Technologies OY and Nokia USA, INC.
Jul 24, 2015Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Independent Inventor Groups.
Aug 24, 2015Brief of respondents Pulse Electronics, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.
Sep 3, 2015Reply of petitioner Halo Electronics, Inc. filed.
Sep 4, 2015Letter received from counsel respondent, amending Rule 29.6. corporate disclosure statement. (Distributed) VIDED
Sep 9, 2015DISTRIBUTED for Conference of September 28, 2015.
Oct 5, 2015DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 9, 2015.
Oct 13, 2015DISTRIBUTED for Conference of October 16, 2015.
Oct 19, 2015Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Nokia Technologies OY and Nokia USA, INC GRANTED.
Oct 19, 2015Motion for leave to file amici brief filed by Independent Inventor Groups GRANTED.
Oct 19, 2015Petition GRANTED granted limited to Question 1 presented by the petition. The petition for a writ of certiorari in No. 14-1520 is granted. The cases are consolidated and a total of one hour is allotted for oral argument.
Oct 21, 2015Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.
Nov 10, 2015Consent to the filing of amicus cuirae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the respondents.
Nov 19, 2015The time to file the joint appendix and petitioners' briefs on the merits is extended to and including December 9, 2015. VIDED
Nov 19, 2015The time to file respondents' briefs on the merits is extended to and including January 13, 2016. VIDED
Dec 9, 2015Joint appendix filed (2 Volumes). (Statement of costs filed)
Dec 9, 2015Brief of petitioner Halo Electronics, Inc. filed.
Dec 14, 2015Brief amici curiae of Mentor Graphics Corp., et al. in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 15, 2015Brief amici curiae of Public Knowledge, The Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Engine Advocacy in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of the United States filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amici curiae of Small Inventors filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Askeladden LLC in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Professors in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amici curiae of Nokia Technologies Oy and Nokia USA Inc. filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Licensing Executives Society (U.S.A. and Canada), Inc. in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Innovention Toys, LLC filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Ericsson Inc. in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of MyKey Technology, Inc. in support of neither party filed.
Dec 16, 2015Brief amicus curiae of Professor Mossoff in support of neither party filed. VIDED.
Dec 23, 2015SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Tuesday, February 23, 2016
Jan 4, 2016Record requested from the U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit.
Jan 12, 2016Record received from U.S.C.A. Federal Circuit is electronic and located on PACER with the exception of an Appendix, also electronic.
Jan 13, 2016Brief of respondents Pulse Electronics, Inc., et al. filed.
Jan 15, 2016CIRCULATED.
Jan 19, 2016Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed. VIDED.
Jan 20, 2016Joint motion for divided argument filed by respondents. VIDED.
Jan 20, 2016Brief amicus curiae of BSA I The Software Alliance filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amici curiae of Intel Corp., et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amicus curiae of Marvell Semiconductor, Inc. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amicus curiae of Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amici curiae of Dell, et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amici curiae of Yahoo! Inc. and Arthrex, Inc. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amici curiae of Certain Members of Congress filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amicus curiae of EMC Corporation filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amici curiae of Google Inc., et al. filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 20, 2016Brief amici curiae of Internet Companies filed. VIDED. (Distributed)
Jan 25, 2016Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED. VIDED
Jan 25, 2016Joint motion for divided argument filed by respondents DENIED. VIDED
Feb 12, 2016Reply of petitioner Halo Electronics, Inc. filed. (Distributed)
Feb 23, 2016Argued. For petitioners: Jeffrey B. Wall, Washington, D. C.; and Roman Martinez, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.) For respondents: Carter G. Phillips, Washington, D. C. VIDED
Jun 13, 2016Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Breyer, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Kennedy and Alito, JJ., joined. VIDED
Jul 15, 2016JUDGMENT ISSUED
Jul 25, 2016AMENDED JUDGMENT ISSUED
Recommended Citation: Halo Electronics Inc. v. Pulse Electronics Inc., SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/halo-electronics-inc-v-pulse-electronics-inc/