Arguments in the Independent Ink Inc. v. Illinois Tools Work and Trident Inc. case were heard in U.S. Supreme Court on Nov. 29.
"The basic arguments were regarding market power," said Ed O'Connor, counsel for Independent Ink. "The Court was cryptic (to read) and somewhat critical of both arguments."
O'Connor said a decision is expected in three to six months.
The Supreme Court is being asked to overturn a long-standing precedent against "tying arrangements," which is the practice of conditioning the use of a patented product (in this case a piezoelectric inkjet print head) on the customer's purchase of a second non-patented product (ink).In the case, Trident and ITW are the patent holders of a print-head technology. Trident and ITW require their print-head customers to use only ink they supply. Independent Ink has alleged that this practice is illegal when the patent holders have market power in the patented product.
On June 18, 2002, a federal district judge in the southern district of California ruled Trident and ITW were not guilty of patent tying and dismissed Independent Ink's case. Independent Ink appealed the decision. On Jan. 25, 2005, an appellate court overturned the 2002 decision. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) concluded that the existence of the patent in the print heads ITW was selling created a presumption of market power. Market power in the patented print heads makes the ink purchase requirement a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
