Briefs in the Knorr-Bremse en banc case

As discussed below, the Federal Circuit has decided to revisit the issue of whether it is right to draw an adverse inference supporting willful infringement when a party accused of willful patent infringement declines to waive attorney-client privilege and produce helpful legal opinions from patent counsel.

The case itself is about patents on braking systems for delivery vehicles and isn't terribly exciting unless you're one of the parties (sorry). But the willfulness issue is important.
The law firm of St. Onge, Steward, Johnston & Reens, LLC has posted the parties' briefs as well as the district court opinion, the order taking the case en banc and related documents on their fine web site. I wish more firms would do this.
We filed an amicus brief
of Public Patent Foundation urging that the court get rid of the adverse inferences and hold that a company does not necessarily have to hire counsel and get a full legal opinion upon merely learning of a potentially relevant patent, and hold that a finding of willfulness is precluded if a party presents a substantial defense.
The Glushko-Samuelson Clinic at American University filed an amicus brief on behalf of Public Knowledge.
Chris Martiniak, one of my mentors and a great lawyer, submitted this brief on behalf of a group of companies and law professors.