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

Patent Suits Have Global Impacts

March 26, 2015

EE Times

By Doris Johnson Hines; Justin A. Hendrix

Authored by Dori J. Hines and Justin A. Hendrix

It's common for electronics companies to engineer their products in the United States but manufacture and sell them abroad. But it's not always clear when such activity is a U.S. "sale" or "offer for sale" that would be covered by U.S. patent law, as we explained in a recent article.

A recent federal court decision showed this uncertainty also exists in the context of a court-imposed injunction following a finding of patent infringement. By understanding the contours of what constitutes a U.S. sale or offer for sale, companies can better understand the range of activities in which they can still operate should they be held liable for patent infringement and find themselves subject to an injunction.

Under U.S. patent law, infringement exists when, among other things, anyone offers to sell or sells a patented invention in the United States without permission from the patent owner. In a recent decision by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit the appeals court having exclusive jurisdiction over patent matters the court explained that no offer to sell occurs in the U.S. when the offer is made in the U.S. but the products are destined for shipment abroad. The court explained that no sale occurs when the parties merely conduct negotiations in the U.S. for sales that occur abroad.

If a court finds a company liable for patent infringement, the court might, in addition to awarding money damages, issue an injunction banning the company from conducting various activities. For example, the injunction might bar the manufacture or sale of infringing products in the U.S., or might bar the import of products into the U.S.

Before recent clarifications in the law, a court imposing an injunction against a patent infringer might ban it from conducting any activity in the U.S. relating to the infringing product. Indeed, in a case involving infringing sales of semiconductor wafer inspection systems, one federal court issued an injunction banning the infringing company from having communications with companies in the U.S. for purposes of selling the infringing systems.

But after the Federal Circuit's recent clarifications, that same court revised its order. In particular, after considering what activities would constitute a sale or offer to sell, the court issued a revised injunction allowing the defendant to both conduct negotiations and to offer to sell its products within the U.S., but only when the products were destination for use abroad.

Thus, the company was allowed to conduct marketing and sales activities that in the past had been prohibited. Similarly, should your company be selling its products overseas and held liable for infringement, it may still be allowed to conduct many activities—including negotiating the sales of those products in the U.S.

Tags

infringement, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Patent Litigation and Trials

Related Industries

Electrical and Computer Technology

Electronic Devices and Components

Related Offices

Palo Alto, CA

Washington, DC

Originally printed in EE Times on March 26, 2015. 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

IAM Live: Navigating the UPC 2026

November 3, 2026

Paris

Conference

4th Global Patent Litigation FORUM

October 29, 2026

Munich

Conference

2026 EDTX Bench Bar Conference

October 28-30, 2026

Fort Worth

Conference

ChIPs Global Summit 2026

October 21-23, 2026

Los Angeles

Seminar

Future IP UK

October 21, 2026

London

Hybrid Conference

Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – California

October 19-20, 2026

San Francisco

Hybrid Conference

Intellectual Property Law Institute 2026 – New York

September 28-29, 2026

New York

Conference

2026 IPO Annual Meeting

September 27-29, 2026

Toronto

Conference

IAM Live: SEP Summit Global 2026

September 9-10, 2026

London

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