Supreme Court Finds Willful Patent Infringement for Deep Fryer
The Supreme Court has ruled that Pentalpha Enterprises, Ltd., a subsidiary of Global-Tech Appliances, Inc., willfully blinded itself to the infringing nature of its actions, and is liable for induced patent infringement of a deep fryer invented by SEB S.A. Pentalpha had purchased an SEB fryer made for sale in a foreign market and copied all but the fryer’s cosmetic features. It then had an attorney look for patent infringment (none was found), without telling him that the fryer was copied. Pentalpha sold the fryers to Sunbeam, which resold them in the U.S. under its own trademarks. SEB sued Sunbeam for patent infringement and then sued Pentalpha, asserting that it had contravened 35 USC 271(b) by actively inducing Sunbeam and the other purchasers of Pentalpha fryers to sell or offer to sell them in violation of SEB’s patent rights.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
In this case, Global-Tech Appliances Inc., et al. v. SEB S.A., the Supreme Court ruled that although there was no direct evidence that Pentalpha knew of SEB’s patent before it received notice of the Sunbeam suit, there was adequate proof that it deliberately took steps to avoid knowing that fact and disregarded a known risk that SEB had a protective patent. The Court stated that such willful disregard is a form of actual knowledge, and that it surpasses recklessness and negligence.