eBay Inc operates a popular Internet website that allows pri

eBay, Inc., operates a popular Internet website that allows private sellers to list goods they wish to sell, either through an auction or at a fixed price. Merc- Exchange, LLC, holds a number of patents, including a business method patent for an electronic market de- signed to facilitate the sale of goods between private individuals by establishing a central authority to pro- mote trust among participants. MercExchange sought to license this patent to eBay, as it had previously done with other companies, but the parties failed to reach an agreement. Later, MercExhange sued eBay for patent infringement in a federal district court. A jury found that MercExchange’s patent was valid, that eBay had infringed it, and that MercExchange was entitled to an award of damages. Following the jury verdict, the district court denied MercExchange’s motion for a permanent injunction to bar eBay from using MercExchange’s patented method. Taking the position that an injunction effectively is a mandatory remedy when a defendant is held liable for patent in- fringement, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the denial of the requested injunc- tion. Was the Federal Circuit correct in taking this position? Is an injunction a mandatory remedy when patent infringement has been established?

Solution

yes, the federal court is correct in this case. but permanent injunction is not correct remedy in this case. but an injuction is mandatory, it facilitates to stop using the patent for a specific period, when the case is in court. untill the statement announced, the parties should not be used the patent.

so, to stop using it temporarily, issuing injuction is compulsory. if any party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties, including possible monetary sanctions and even imprisonment. They can also be charged with contempt of court.