trca vs insmed
this should make it harder for tercica to get an injunction against insmed.
Supreme Court Orders New Lower Court Hearing in eBay Case Copyright Case
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court sided with eBay in a patent fight over
a selling feature Monday, in a ruling that will make it easier for high-tech
companies to avoid court injunctions in such disputes.
ADVERTISEMENTJustices, in a unanimous opinion, said that judges have
flexibility before they impose court orders barring continued use of a
technology after juries find a patent violation. They must consider several
factors, the court said.
The decision threw out a ruling by a federal appeals court that said
injunctions should be automatic unless there are exceptional circumstances.
The case had been closely watched by businesses of all types.
!!!!!!!!!READ BELOW!!!!!!!!!!
High-tech companies said that they needed protection from "patent
trolls,"
small companies that sue larger firms over ideas they have never developed
into products.
!!!!!!!!!READ ABOVE!!!!!!!!!!
Drug and biotechnology companies argued that court injunctions were needed
to shield their ideas and recoup costs of their investments.
The fight centered on eBay's fixed-price purchase option, which allows
buyers to purchase items without bidding.
MercExchange, a small Virginia company, sought an injunction to prevent eBay
from using the technology. The company's founder, patent lawyer Thomas
Woolston, had come up with the idea of using an electronic network of
consignment stores that would ensure legitimacy of sales by taking
possession of the goods being offered.
A jury had sided with MercExchange, finding that its patent had been
infringed, and awarded the patent-holder $35 million. A trial judge later
reduced the award by $5.5 million. The Supreme Court ruling does not affect
the judgment against eBay.
An appeals court said that MercExchange was entitled to an injunction. But
eBay and other high-tech companies had told the Supreme Court that
patent-holding companies could use the threat of court injunctions to coerce
larger firms into settling lawsuits for huge sums of money.
In a brief opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas said that neither the district
court nor appeals court that had considered the eBay case "fairly applied
... traditional equitable principles" in deciding MercExchange's motion
for
a permanent injunction.
A judge must now consider whether an injunction is appropriate in the case.
MercExchange said in a statement that it was confident it would again win an
injunction, noting that the high court rejected the notion that injunctions
were not appropriate for patent owners willing to license their patents and
use them commercially.
Although the decision was unanimous, some justices wrote to explain their
votes.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote an opinion that was joined by Justices
Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote an
opinion that was joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter and
Stephen Breyer.
The case is eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, 05-130.
