Illinois Tool Works, Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc.
Independent Ink sued Illinois Tool Works, claiming that one of its companies, Trident, had violated sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by illegally tying its unpatented ink to its patented printheads. Trident makes ink and printheads, and requires anyone who uses Trident printheads to also purchase its ink. Independent Ink makes ink that is compatible with Trident’s printheads.
The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Trident, holding that a plaintiff alleging patent tying in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act must prove that the defendant had market power. Market power refers to the defendant’s ability to raise prices in the market for the tying product (in this case, the printheads), enabling it to burden purchasers beyond what would occur in a completely competitive market. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed, holding that when the tying product is patented, market power may be presumed rather than proven, and the defendant must rebut the presumption that it had market power in the tying product.
Question Presented:
Whether, in an action under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. ยง 1, alleging that the defendant engaged in unlawful tying by conditioning a patent
license on the licensee's purchase of a non-patented good, the plaintiff must prove as part of its affirmative case that the defendant possessed market power in the relevant market for the tying
product, or market power instead is presumed based solely on the existence of the patent on the tying product.
