直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

Beating "Willful Infringement": A New Alternative?

July 23, 2020

World Intellectual Property Review

By Lionel M. Lavenue; R. Benjamin B Cassady; Kevin J. Spinella

In the US, a patent holder who can prove willful patent infringement can obtain treble damages. This can put dollar signs in the eyes of plaintiffs so, to establish knowledge, patent holders often send letters notifying potential infringers of their patented claims. In turn, this presents a delicate tightrope for defendants to walk by forcing them to decide how, and if, to respond.

A common defense mechanism is to file away any accusation and, while waiting to be sued, prepare an opinion of counsel confirming that a recipient’s allegedly infringing activities were done in good faith and do not infringe.

These opinions are expensive and they have some risks, such as waiving privilege with opinion counsel. But a new decision indicates that another possible defense is available when business or cost reasons dictate.

In IP Power Holdings v. Westfield Outdoor, issued in June 2020, the US District Court for the District of Nevada found that a substantive response to a demand letter can demonstrate a good-faith belief of noninfringement, especially when the response explains why the recipient believes it does not infringe.

Read the full article here. 

Tags

willful infringement

Related Practices

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Related Offices

Reston, VA

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Lionel M. Lavenue
Partner
Reston, VA
+1 571 203 2750
Email

Originally printed in World IP Review on July 23, 2020. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm’s clients.

Related Insights

Conference

2027 ABA-IPL Section Annual Meeting – IPLSPRING

April 14-15, 2027

Arlington

Reception

2026 IPO Education Foundation Awards Dinner

December 15, 2026

Washington, DC

Conference

IP Life Sciences Forum 2026

December 13-15, 2026

Coral Gables

Panel Discussion

2026 Advanced Patent Law Institute

December 3-4, 2026

Stanford

Webinar

Data and Market Exclusivity: An Update on China’s New Law and Comparisons to the US and Europe

November 19, 2026

Webinar

Conference

IPBC Asia 2026

November 17-19, 2026

Tokyo

Charitable

2026 ALYN Hospital Wheels of Love Ride

November 8-12, 2026

Northern District

Conference

2026 ANA Masters of Advertising Law Conference

November 2-4, 2026

Huntington Beach

Conference

Life Sciences Patent Network North America Fall 2026

November 2-3, 2026

San Francisco

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP