Commil, USA, LLC sued Cisco Systems, Inc. for patent infringement and inducing patent infringement with regard to Commil’s patented method of implementing short-range wireless networks.  Today, in Commil, USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 13-896, the Supreme Court rejected Cisco’s argument that a good faith belief in the invalidity of a patent is a defense to a claim of inducing infringement.   The Court, through Justice Kennedy, stated the issue as follows:  “whether knowledge of, or belief in, a patent’s validity is required for induced infringement under §271(b).”   The Court answered:  “No.” Before reaching the specific issue, Justice Kennedy reiterated the Court’s holding in Global Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., 563 U.S. ___, 131 S.Ct. 2060, 179 L.Ed.2d 1167 (2011), namely that induced infringement can only attach if the defendant knew of the patent and knew as well that “the induced acts constitute patent infringement.”  (131 S.Ct. at  2068.)  With this reiteration, Justice Kennedy explained that a good faith belief in the invalidity of the patent is not inconsistent with the scienter requirement of Global Tech.  “The scienter element for induced infringement concerns infringement; that is a different issue than validity. . . .  [B]ecause infringement and validity are separate issues under the [Patent] Act, belief regarding validity cannot negate the scienter required under §271(b).” Justice Kennedy also noted that permitting the defense of a “good faith belief of the invalidity of a patent” would undermine the presumption that a patent is presumed to be valid.   “[I]f belief in invalidity were a defense to induced infringement, the force of that presumption would be lessened to a drastic degree, for a defendant could prevail if he proved he reasonably believed the patent was invalid.”  Such a result, according to Justice Kennedy, would circumvent the requirement that the presumption be rebutted with clear and convincing evidence.