Demjanjuk v. Petrovsky

affirming district court ruling of no willfulness despite defendant’s knowledge of the patent and failure to seek advice of counsel | “[T]he focus of inquiry is on the circumstances and status of those harmed and not merely on whether the acts were committed during the disorder.” | “The law of the United States includes international law,” citing The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677, 712, 20 S.Ct. 290, 304, 44 L.Ed. 320 (1900) | “trade secret law is intended to maintain and promote standards of commercial ethics and fair dealing” | defendant's reasonable belief that its activities fell within its own patent claims, although irrelevant in an infringement analysis, is a factor in determining intent with respect to willful infringement | “[s]ome devices are so simple and their purpose and efficacy so obvious that their complete construction is sufficient to demonstrate workability” | interpretation of treaty language by the Department of State is “entitled to considerable deference” | “the policies expressed in the federal antitrust laws will override any agreement in contravention of those policies, regardless of the agreement’s legality under private contract law” | defendant’s reasonable belief that its activities fell within its own patent claims, although irrelevant in an infringement analysis, is a factor in determining intent with respect to willful infringement | court "should always look at the totality of the circumstances" | court “should always look at the totality of the circumstances”