Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

May 13, 2015, Decided

2009-1372, 2009-1380, 2009-1416, 2009-1417


 [*903]  [***1750]   Linn, Circuit Judge.

This appeal returns to us following remand from the United States Supreme Court. See Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs., Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2111, 189 L. Ed. 2d 52 (2014). Because our prior decisions in BMC Resources, Inc. v. Paymentech, L.P., 498 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2007), and Muniauction, Inc. v. Thomson Corp., 532 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2008), directly apply to the facts of this case and because the statutory framework of 35 U.S.C. § 271 does not admit to the sweeping notions of common-law tort liability argued in this case, we again conclude [**6]  that because Limelight Networks, Inc. ("Limelight") did not perform all of the steps of the asserted method claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,108,703 (the "'703 patent") and because the record contains no basis on which to impose liability on Limelight for the actions of its customers who carried out the other steps, Limelight has not directly infringed the '703 patent under § 271(a). Accordingly, we affirm the district court's finding of noninfringement and do not reach Limelight's cross-appeal regarding damages. We also confirm our previously reinstated affirmance of the district court's judgment of noninfringement of U.S. Patents No. 6,553,413 (the "'413 patent") and No. 7,103,645 (the "'645 patent"). See Akamai, 629 F.3d 1311 (Fed. Cir. 2010), which was vacated, 419 F. App'x 989 (Fed. Cir.  [*904]  2011) (en banc), and then partially reinstated. Order No. 2009-1372 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 27, 2012) (en banc).

I. Background

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

786 F.3d 899 *; 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7856 **; 114 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1749 ***


Subsequent History: Vacated by, Rehearing, en banc, granted by Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14178 (Fed. Cir., Aug. 13, 2015)

Substituted opinion at, En banc Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 797 F.3d 1020, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14175 (Fed. Cir., Aug. 13, 2015)

Prior History:  [**1] Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Nos. 06-CV-11585, 06-CV-11109, Judge Rya W. Zobel.

Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs., Inc., 134 S. Ct. 2111, 189 L. Ed. 2d 52, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 3817 (U.S., 2014)Akamai Tech., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, 494 F. Supp. 2d 34, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47598 (D. Mass., 2007)

Disposition: AFFIRMED.


infringement, patent, customers, steps, Akamai, joint tort feasor, single entity, common law, parties, tagging, inducement, invention, contributory, patentee, entity, performing, principles, patent infringement, joint enterprise, concerted action, patented invention, act in concert, patent law, includes, cases, jointly, vicarious liability, manufacturer, tortious, concert

Patent Law, Infringement Actions, Infringing Acts, General Overview, Business & Corporate Compliance, Indirect Infringement, Torts, Procedural Matters, Multiple Defendants, Public Entity Liability, Liability, Vicarious Liability, Governments, Legislation, Interpretation, Concerted Action, Civil Aiding & Abetting, Utility Patents, Process Patents, Business & Corporate Law, Agency Relationships, Duties & Liabilities, Vicarious Liability, Joint Ventures