NCS Multistage Inc. v. TCO Group AS

NCS Multistage Inc. v. TCO Group AS The Federal Circuit affirmed the contributory-infringement judgment, holding that TCO forfeited its appellate challenges by not preserving them in post-trial briefing and could not relitigate a claim construction it had sought below. The court vacated the no-invalidity judgment and remanded for a new invalidity trial based on related claim-construction and § 102(b) jury-instruction issues. The decision underscores that claim-construction and JMOL arguments must be preserved with precision, and that one adequately supported indirect-infringement theory can sustain an infringement judgment. Affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part, and remanded; no costs. Claim 29’s “rupturing force” limitation was construed to require rupturing hydraulic pressure, and the Federal Circuit held TCO could not argue on appeal for an impact-force theory after proposing the adopted construction below. The court affirmed contributory infringement because TCO failed to preserve its arguments that its subsidiary—not TCO—sold the accused glass packs and that TCO’s subjective noninfringement belief negated § 271(c) scienter. Even if TCO’s cursory scienter argument had been preserved, the record contained substantial evidence from which the jury could find knowledge of infringement. Because contributory infringement independently supported the infringement judgment, the court did not reach TCO’s induced-infringement arguments. The court vacated the no-invalidity judgment and remanded for a new invalidity trial, following its related decision addressing the “casing string” construction and § 102(b) jury-instruction issues. non-precedential claim construction infringement § 102 waiver / forfeiture remand non-precedential claim construction infringement § 102 waiver / forfeiture remand claim construction infringement waiver / forfeiture remand § 102