Jury Finding of Willfulness Is Sufficient in View of Halo

Jul 14, 2016

Reading Time : 1 min

While this matter was under advisement, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. In the Halo decision, the Supreme Court overruled the objective prong of Seagate, leaving the issue of willfulness as solely a factual issue for the jury. In this case, “the jury was instructed to make a factual determination as to whether the DRGEM defendants acted willfully, and the jury answered this question in the affirmative.” Because the court no longer needed to analyze the “objective recklessness” prong of Seagate, the jury’s finding was sufficient to support a finding of willfulness in view of Halo.

Sociedad Espanola De Electromedicina y Calidad v. Blue Ridge X-Ray Co., C.A. No. 1:10-cv-00159-MR (W.D.N.C. July 8, 2016).

Share This Insight

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.