Willful or Not? Proof of Recklessness and Opinions of Counsel after In re Seagate

San Diego Presentation


San Diego, CA

September 13, 2007
Registration: 7:30 am – 8:00 am
Program: 8:00 am – 10:00 am
Breakfast will be provided

Morrison & Foerster LLP
12531 High Bluff Drive, #100
San Diego, CA

Almost every patent case today alleges willful infringement, and the Federal Circuit has just rewritten the rules on what constitutes "willfulness." Its en banc decision in In re Seagate defines "willfulness" as objective recklessness, at a minimum. The decision also limits the scope of the waiver of the attorney-client privilege upon production of an opinion of counsel so that communications with trial counsel remain protected. As a global leader in intellectual property law, Morrison & Foerster is pleased to offer clients and friends a seminar on the decision’s consequences for the legal and business community. Our leading patent prosecutors and IP litigators will share their views on the decision’s practical ramifications for patent law. They will discuss:

  • Where the new definition of willfulness comes from and what it means.
  • How one proves or disproves willfulness now.
  • What a company should do if it gets a demand letter tomorrow.
  • Under what circumstances opinions of counsel are still useful.
  • What waiver issues remain for a party producing an opinion of counsel.
  • Whether this decision, with others, will change the economics of patent litigation

This program will also be presented in the following locations:

Palo Alto, September 11th
Northern Virginia, September 20th




Unsolicited e-mails and information sent to Morrison & Foerster will not be considered confidential, may be disclosed to others pursuant to our Privacy Policy, may not receive a response, and do not create an attorney-client relationship with Morrison & Foerster. If you are not already a client of Morrison & Foerster, do not include any confidential information in this message. Also, please note that our attorneys do not seek to practice law in any jurisdiction in which they are not properly authorized to do so.