CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854
By Jere Keys http://www.flickr.com/photos/tyreseus/ - http://www.flickr.com/photos/tyreseus/507218014/, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16187887

Supreme Court Nixes Laches Defense in Diaper Patent Case

US Supreme Court
rules laches is no defense
in patent lawsuit

The US Supreme Court has vacated a Federal Circuit decision and ruled that laches cannot be invoked as a defense against a claim for patent damages when the case was brought within the six-year limitation period of 35 U.S.C. 286.

The case of SCA Hygiene Prods. Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Prods. involved rival sellers of adult incontinence products.

In 2013, SCA sent a letter to First Quality alleging that it was making and selling products that infringed SCA’s patent rights.

First Quality responded that one of its own patents antedated the SCA patent at issue and thus that the SCA patent was invalid.

SCA seemingly dropped the subject and First Quality proceeded to further develop and market its adult diaper products.

In 2004, SCA asked the Patent and Trademark Office to initiate a reexamination of the SCA patent in light of the First Quality patent. Three years later, in 2007, the Patent Office issued a certificate confirming the validity of the SCA patent.

In 2010, SCA filed a patent infringement lawsuit against First Quality.

First Quality moved for summary judgement based on laches and equitable estoppel. The district court granted that motion and the Federal Circuit affirmed.

Laches, as defined by the Supreme Court, is “a defense developed by courts of equity” to protect defendants against “unreasonable, prejudicial delay in commencing suit.”

The Court noted that “Laches is a gap-filling doctrine, and where there is a statute of limitations, there is no gap to fill.”

The Court noted:

Section 286 of the Patent Act provides: “Except as otherwise provided by law, no recovery shall be had for any infringement com- mitted more than six years prior to the filing of the complaint or counterclaim for infringement in the action.” By the logic of [the Court’s previous decision in] Petrella, we infer that this provision represents a judgment by Congress that a patentee may recover damages for any infringement committed within six years of the filing of the claim.

Takeaway

The decision is good news for patent owners, as it makes clear that patent damages are available for up to a six-year period. However, that doesn’t mean that it’s a good idea to wait around to bring a claim for patent infringement.

Related Articles

Buying Rival’s Trademark as Keyword Search Doesn’t Violate Lanham Act

The Ninth Circuit has affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment for the defendant in a case in which the plaintiff law firm claimed ...
Read More

What does copyright law have to do with McDonalds ice cream machines?

The US Copyright Office has granted a copyright exemption giving restaurants the right to repair broken equipment by bypassing locks intended to prevent anyone other ...
Read More

What’s Happening with AI and Copyright Law

Not surprisingly, a lot is happening at the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and intellectual property (IP) law. Here’s a roundup of some recent developments ...
Read More

Let's work together.

Contact us to set up a meeting with an attorney or team member.

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design

call us  206.533.3854