IP News

On Aug. 5, 2016, a Federal Circuit panel of Judges Lourie, O'Malley, and Hughes issued a unanimous decision, authored by Judge Lourie, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., Case Nos. 2013-1472, 2013-1656. The case was on remand from the Supreme Court after its June 13, 2016 decision, which held that the Federal Circuit erred in applying the “unduly rigid” test for enhanced damages under the framework in In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (en banc). The Federal Circuit, following the Supreme Court's guidance, vacated the district court's original ruling declining to enhance damages, reasoning that that decision was made under the now-abandoned Seagate test.

Halo had originally sued Pulse in 2007 for infringement of U.S. Patents Nos. 5,656,985, 6,297,720, and 6,344,785 (collectively, “the Halo patents”). The district court had granted Pulse's motion for summary judgment: 1) that it did not directly infringe the Halo patents with respect to products Pulse manufactured, shipped, and delivered to buyers outside the United States; and 2) that its infringement was not willful with respect to products Pulse did sell and deliver within the United States, and so enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. '284 were inappropriate. On appeal from the district court, the Federal Circuit applied the Seagate two-part test for willful infringement and enhanced damages, and ultimately affirmed each holding of the district court. On the question of enhanced damages, the Supreme Court held that the Seagate test was impermissibly rigid, and remanded the case to the Federal Circuit for further proceedings.