The Role of Laches, Equitable Estoppel and Statute of Limitations in Patent Infringement Litigation under U.S Law: Lessons for Iranian Law

Abbasi, Simin

doi:10.48308/eclr.2025.238635.1135

The Role of Laches, Equitable Estoppel and Statute of Limitations in Patent Infringement Litigation under U.S Law: Lessons for Iranian Law

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Simin Abbasi ^¶

Ph.D., Faculty of Law and Political Science, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran. Std_abbasi378@alumni.khu.ac.ir

https://doi.org/10.48308/eclr.2025.238635.1135

Abstract

Undoubtedly, the doctrine of laches is employed in U.S. law as a tool to balance the rights of patent holders and patent infringers. However, certain decisions, such as the U.S Supreme Court's decision in SCA, have disregarded this doctrine in favor of others, such as equitable estoppel and statutory limitations, which some believe have disrupted this balance. Given that maintaining equilibrium between the rights of patent holders and infringers plays a crucial role in economic development and national progress, this article aims to provide a legal analysis of this issue and propose an appropriate framework. The main research question is: How can a balance be established between the rights of patent holders and innovative infringers in the U.S. legal system by considering the doctrines of laches, equitable estoppel, and statutory limitations? Additionally, what model can be proposed for Iranian law? Based on the findings of this study, which adopts a descriptive-analytical approach, the aforementioned decisions have both supporters and critics. However, given the distinct elements, conditions, and effects of each of these mechanisms, combining them in legal cases based on specific circumstances is preferable to discarding any of them in order to maintain a fair balance between the rights of patent holders and infringers. Similarly, in Iranian law, a suitable model can be developed and implemented by utilizing existing legal principles, institutional frameworks, and drawing insights from advanced legal systems

Keywords

Aukerman

misleading

Petrella

SCA

unjust delay

Books
1. Skini, Rabiah, Commercial Law (Bill of Exchange, Promissory Note,Warrant, Bearer Bonds, and Cheque), 6th ed, Tehran: Samt, 2002. (in Persian)
Articles
1. Broder, Amie N., “Comparing Apples to Apples: Importing the Doctrine of Adverse Possession in Real Property to Patent Law”, NYU Journal of Law & Liberty, Vol. 557, 2007, pp. 557-598.
2. Carter, Cody M., "Filling the Gap Left by SCA Hygiene Prods. Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Prods., LLC: The Role of Equitable Estoppel in Patent Law", Baylor Law Review, Vol. 72, No. 3, 2020, pp. 695-720.
3. Holbrook, Timothy R., "The Supreme Court’s Quiet Revolution in Induced Patent Infringement", Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 91, No. 3, 2016, pp. 1007-1044.
4. Karshtedt, Dmitry, Mark D. Janis, and Ted M. Sichelman, "Patent Law: An Open-Source Casebook", GW Law Faculty Publications & Other Works, 2021. Available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3837431. (Last visited on: 02/03/2025).
5. Laser, Christa J., "Equitable Defenses in Patent Law", University of Miami Law Review, Vol. 75, No. 1, 2020, pp. 1-75.
6. Mashaikhi, Satar, and Hamidreza Adabi, “Scope and Characteristics of the Estoppel Rule in Domestic Public Law”, International Journal of Nations Research, Vol. 4, No. 40, Farvardin 2019, pp. 69-88. https://doi.org/10.30497/leg.2017.2648 (in Persian)
7. Nouri, Jafar, and Abdurashid Akhundi, “Economic Analysis of Law on limitation ( laps of time)”, Private Law Research Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 5, Winter 2013, pp. 35-60. (in Persian)
8. Peñalver, Eduardo and Oskar Liivak, "The Right Not to Use in Property and Patent Law", Cornell Law Review, Vol. 98, 2013, pp. 1437-1494.
9. PoorSeyed, Behzad, and Rasoul Aghadadashi, “Similarity and dissimilarity of Promissory Estoppel Doctorine to Misleading Rule and Confession”, Bi-quarterly Journal Govah Legal Education Article 4, Vol.3, No.2 (Serial 5), Autumn & Winter 2017, pp. 97-126. https://doi.org/30497/leg.2017.2648 (in Persian)
10. Sedighi, Alireza, and Abolhasan Mojtahed Soleimani, The role of prescription rules in the establishment and consolidation of the ownership entity a comparative study of Islam, Iran and the English Law Comparative Law Researches Quarterly, Vol. 24, No. 1, Spring 2020, pp. 87-121. https://doi.org/1001.1.22516751.1399.24.1.2.0. (in Persian)
11. Shaffer, Molly and Van Houweling, "Equitable Estoppel and Information Costs in Contemporary Copyright", Lewis & Clark Law Review, Vol. 23, No. 2, 2019, pp. 553-570.
12. Waxman, Seth P., "May You Live in Interesting Times: Patent Law in the Supreme Court", Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018, pp. 213-225.
Online Resources
1. Congressional Research Service, "Patent Law: A Primer and Overview of Emerging Issue.," Available at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44962. (Last visited 02/03/2025).
2. Crain, N. Andrew, Dan R. Green, and Thomas Horstemeyer, "Morris & Associates, Inc. v. John Bean Technologies Corporation, Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit", Available at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-495/66897/20181015154405505_Petition.pdf. (Last visited 02/03/2025).
3. DeFranco, Denise W. and Nancy J. Mertzel, "Brief of Amicus Curiae American Intellectual Property Law Association in Support of Neither Party, SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, No. 15-927", Supreme Court of the United States, July 22, 2016. Available at: https://www.aipla.org/docs/default-source/advocacy/judicial/aipla-amicus-sca-v-first-quality.pdf. (Last visited 02/03/2025).
4. Peters, Diane M., "Understanding Patent Pledges: An Overview of Legal Considerations." Available at:
https://patentcommons.org/publications/OSDL_Whitepaper_Final_final_4-12-06.pdf. (Last visited 02/03/2025).
1. Sprint Communications Company L.P. v. Comcast Cable Communications LLC, et al. Case No. 11-2684-JWL, and Sprint Communications Company L.P. v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., et al. Case No. 11-2686-JWL. United States District Court for the District of Kansas. Memorandum and Order. Available at: https://ecf.ksd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2011cv2684-318. (Last visited 02/03/2025