In Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., an en banc Federal Circuit unanimously overturned a decision that Limelight did not directly infringe Akamai’s patent covering a method for delivery of web content. Limelight was found to perform all steps of the method, except a “tagging” step, which was performed by its customers. The district court held that Limelight did not directly infringe, because it did not direct or control this step, which was performed by its customers. On first review, a Federal Circuit panel affirmed the decision, finding that direct infringement can be found only when all steps are performed by, or attributed to, a single entity, including a principal-agent, contractual, or joint enterprise relationship.
The en banc Federal Circuit ruled that the factual scenario may warrant attributing others’ performance of method steps to a single actor for finding direct infringement under 35 USC 271(a). The holding requires analysis in future cases to account for specific facts when assessing attribution. The en banc Federal Circuit ruled that the factual scenario may warrant attributing others’ performance of method steps to a single actor for finding direct infringement under 35 USC 271(a).
source: Maier & Maier, PLLC
345 South Patrick Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
www.maierandmaier.com
