As a community service, an educational series by the

IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq.

Copyright 2010 The IP and Business Law Offices of Howard L. Hoffenberg, Esq. All Rights Reserved.

Return to Index of Tour of US Supreme Court Patent Cases from 1961 to 1999

HOLDING:(1) 35 USC 271 (c) and (d) confer upon a patentee, as a lawful adjunct to the patent rights, a limited power to exclude others from competition in nonstaple goods. (2) A conditioning by a patentee of the use of the patented process on purchasing the nonstaple good from the patentee is nothing more than a combination of acts expressly excluded from being patent misuse by Section 271 (c); i.e., selling nonstaple goods; authorizing others to do so and bringing suit for contributory infringement.

DAWSON CHEMICAL CO. v. ROHM & HAAS CO., 448 U.S. 176 (June 27, 1980)

 

FACTS: R&H patented a method of using propanil as a herbicide. Propanil itself was an unpatented and nonstaple good. R&H linked use of its patented method with purchasing propanil from it. Dawson sold propanil and R&H sued for contributory infringement. Dawson charged patent misuse based on tying by R&H.

Tour of US Supreme Court Patent Cases from 1961 to 1999

***

A Fast and Easy Way to Learn the High Points of Patent Law and Related Anti-trust Law

Community Service and

Pro Bono

In addition to this education series, Mr. Hoffenberg gives of his time to benefit the community and contribute to the quality justice in the State of California. For many years, he served as a volunteer pro tem in the Municipal Court in traffic, landlord-tenant, small claims and short cause matters. Currently, Mr. Hoffenberg serves as a volunteer arbitrator for the Dispute Resolution Service in attorney-client fee disputes and as a quasi-volunteer mediator in the Court of Appeals.