Judge Albright Holds Willful Infringement Pleading Does Not Require Allegations Of Egregious Infringing Behavior

• Published date: 25 July 2022
• Subject Matter: Intellectual Property, Patent
• Law Firm: Mintz
• Author: Mr Adam Samansky, Peter Cuomo and Joseph Rutkowski

On July 12, 2022, U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas denied alleged infringer Lenovo's motion to dismiss ACQIS's willful and indirect infringement and enhanced damages claims, holding that patent owners need not allege egregious infringing behavior to assert a claim of willful infringement.

What Can You Do Today?

We provide additional context regarding Judge Albright's decision below and will continue to cover the issue across the district courts should the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") provide additional guidance. In the meantime:

• Practitioners before Judge Albright in the Western District of Texas likely need not plead "egregious" acts of infringement to survive a motion to dismiss directed to allegations of willful infringement and enhanced damages.
• The pleading standard in other jurisdictions may vary, and practitioners should consider the state of the case law in the particular jurisdiction, as district courts remain unsettled on the issue of willful infringement pleading requirements and the CAFC has declined to consider at least one recent request to opine on the subject from Judge Alsup in the Northern District of California. (See "Potential for Division Among the District Courts Continues" section, below.)

Judge Albright's Willful and Secondary Infringement Rulings

On October 15, 2020, ACQIS sued Lenovo for patent infringement and on May 28, 2021, filed a First Amended Complaint alleging that Lenovo's computer products infringe nine ACQIS patents. Lenovo moved to dismiss various aspects of the amended complaint, including its allegations of willful infringement. In its decision, the court initially observed that a willfulness claim requires defendant's knowledge of the asserted patent, infringement after acquiring that knowledge, and that the defendant knew or should have known its conduct amounted to infringement. Here, the court found ACQIS sufficiently plead Lenovo's knowledge of the patents and infringement thereof in the form of a notice letter from ACQIS to Lenovo's CEO dated May 15, 2018, two years prior to the original complaint. The letter listed each of the asserted patents along with a detailed explanation of their validity and successful litigation history. The court also held that this letter satisfied the knowledge requirement at the pleading stage as to all related Lenovo defendants due to their alleged operation as a "multinational conglomerate" and the letter being...