IP News

Supreme Court to Review Federal Circuit Antitrust Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in Independent Ink, Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc., 396 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2005), a case involving the question of whether there is a presumption of market power in Section 1 Sherman Act cases.

In this case, Trident, Inc., a subsidiary of Illinois Tool Works, Inc., manufactures printheads and ink for use in its printheads. The printheads are patent protected, but the ink is not. Trident required manufacturers that licensed its printhead technology to only purchase Trident ink. Independent Ink, which manufactures ink compatible with Trident printheads, sued Trident alleging that Trident violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by tying sales of its non-patented ink to its patented printheads.

The district court granted Trident's motion for summary judgment and dismissed Independent's antitrust claims, reasoning that Independent had not proved that Trident exercised “market power.” The district court rejected Supreme Court precedent that held that the tying of patented and unpatented products was presumed to be anticompetitive. Because the lawsuit originally included patent issues, the case was appealed to the Federal Circuit. In January 2005, the Federal Circuit partially overruled the district court and held that Independent did not have to prove market power to demonstrate a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Rather, the court noted that summary judgment would have to be granted to Independent unless Trident could rebut the presumption that it illegally exercised market power.

Supreme Court to Review Federal Circuit Antitrust Decision

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to review the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision in Independent Ink, Inc. v. Illinois Tool Works, Inc ., 396 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2005), a case involving the question of whether there is a presumption of market power in Section 1 Sherman Act cases.

In this case, Trident, Inc., a subsidiary of Illinois Tool Works, Inc., manufactures printheads and ink for use in its printheads. The printheads are patent protected, but the ink is not. Trident required manufacturers that licensed its printhead technology to only purchase Trident ink. Independent Ink, which manufactures ink compatible with Trident printheads, sued Trident alleging that Trident violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by tying sales of its non-patented ink to its patented printheads.

The district court granted Trident's motion for summary judgment and dismissed Independent's antitrust claims, reasoning that Independent had not proved that Trident exercised “market power.” The district court rejected Supreme Court precedent that held that the tying of patented and unpatented products was presumed to be anticompetitive. Because the lawsuit originally included patent issues, the case was appealed to the Federal Circuit. In January 2005, the Federal Circuit partially overruled the district court and held that Independent did not have to prove market power to demonstrate a violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Rather, the court noted that summary judgment would have to be granted to Independent unless Trident could rebut the presumption that it illegally exercised market power.