CAFC reverses willful infringement in Stryker v. Zimmer

The CAFC illustrated the difficulty the patentee faces in meeting the objective prong of Seagate.

From the decision:


The district court failed to undertake an objective as-
sessment of Zimmer’s specific defenses to Stryker’s
claims. Instead,the district court’s analysis of objective
reasonableness summarily asserted
that the “jury heard testimony” that Zimmer “all but instructed its design
team to copy Stryker’s products.”
(...)
A
n objective assessment of the case shows that Zim-
mer presented reasonable defenses to all of the asserted
claims of Stryker’s patents




link: http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/images/stories/opinions-orders/13-1668.Opinion.12-16-2014.1.PDF