October Term 2013 · Docket 12-786
Does indirect patent infringement require direct infringement?
Limelight argues that inducing infringement requires direct infringement. Akamai argues that inducement liability exists without it.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Panner argued that the Patent Act text requires direct infringement for indirect liability.
Ms. Anders argued that the Federal Circuit's holding on inducement liability is legally incorrect.
Mr. Waxman argued that Limelight's theory allows parties to divide steps without liability.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-43
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on Section 271(b) of the Patent Act. Limelight seeks to limit liability. Akamai seeks to expand it.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 30, 2014.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
Limelight wants the Court to require direct infringement for inducement liability.
Akamai wants the Court to allow inducement liability without direct infringement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
What each side says
Limelight argues that Section 271(b) requires actionable direct infringement under Section 271(a).
Akamai argues that parties can divide method steps to avoid liability under Limelight's theory.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked if Limelight's position makes it easy to bypass patent protection.
Justice Kennedy asked if the rule should differ for method patents versus device patents.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-43
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of patent liability. It determines how companies structure their operations. It affects the enforceability of method patents.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 25-29 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 25-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 43-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 43-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 39-1 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 39-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 15-17 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 15-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 41-43 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 41-43
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 17, lines 29-39 — Transcript, file page 17, lines 29-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 27, lines 39-23 — Transcript, file page 27, lines 39-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-23 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-23
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.