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

Webinar

Post-Sales Restrictions After Impression Products v. Lexmark

August 2, 2017

Webinar

View Webinar

The United States Supreme Court recently decided that a patent owner’s authorized sale of a patented item exhausts all patent rights to that item in Impression Products v. Lexmark International. Although this forecloses patent infringement suits to control downstream use of products through post-sales restrictions, the Court expressly left open the possibility of retaining control through licensing and contract law. The Court, however, did not provide much guidance as to how patent owners can use licensing or contract law to control use of their products. Patent owners must now consider how to navigate the various possibilities in the post-Impression Products era.

Please join our panelists as they discuss the potential impacts of Impression Products for patent owners and strategies for dealing with the aftermath of the decision, including:

  • When contractual provisions will be treated as a sale or a license
  • Whether certain types of licenses are enforceable under contract law
  • Strategies for controlling downstream use of products

Moderator: 
Stephen E. Kabakoff

Speakers: 
D. Brian Kacedon 
Kevin D. Rodkey

Date:

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Time:

10:00 - 11:00 a.m. PDT
1:00 - 2:00 p.m. EDT

Scheduling Conflict? Finnegan records all hosted webinars. To view the recorded program, simply register for the webinar and you will receive an access link shortly after the live program is complete.

Tags

infringement, Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS)

Downloadable Files

  • Post-Sales Restrictions After Impression Products v. Lexmark

Related Practices

Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions

Licensing, Pooling, and Other Transactions

Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials

Patent Litigation and Trials

Related Industries

Consumer Goods and Services

Consumer Products

Related Professionals

Kevin D. Rodkey
Partner
Atlanta, GA
+1 404 653 6484
Email
D. Brian Kacedon
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4301
Email

Related Insights

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: April 2026

June 1, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Consistency Is Key – USPTO Issues Three New Informative Decisions

May 29, 2026

Articles

Colorado Replaces Landmark AI Act: An Overview of the New SB 26-189 Framework

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Claim Disclaimer Derails Instituted IPR in Freightcar America

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026

May 26, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Before the Holding, the Message: Director Squires Uses Magnolia Medical to Outline PTAB Discretionary Denial Policy Changes

May 20, 2026

Seminar

IP Strategy at the Crossroads: Technology, Enforcement, and Contracts

May 15, 2026

Taipei

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms § 102(b) Invalidity; Source Code Commands Are Not Hearsay

May 14, 2026

INCONTESTABLE® Blog

Netflix Prevails in Copyright Infringement Suit Regarding Tiger King

May 14, 2026

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