一、引言2016年6月13日,美國最高法院公佈了Halo Electronics v.Pulse Electronics和Stryker v.Zimmer兩案(以下簡稱“Halo案”)的聯合判决。~1該聯合判决廢棄了聯邦巡廽上訴法院關於美國專利法下對故意侵權給予懲罰性賠償性所適用的Seagate檢驗標準。~2在判决中,美國最高法院從三個方面改變了Seagate標準:1.廢除了Seagate標準中的客觀輕率(objective recklessness)要件,將懲罰性賠償的關注重心集中到特定案件中侵權人惡意行爲的主觀方面;2.將專利權人的侵 I. Introduction On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States announced the joint judgment of Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics and Stryker v. Zimmer (hereinafter referred to as the “Halo case”). ~ 1 The Joint Judgment discarded the Federal Circuit’s Court of Seagate test of punitive damages for intentional infringement under U.S. Patent Law. In the judgment, the Supreme Court of the United States changed Seagate’s standards in three ways: 1. Abolishing objective recklessness in the Seagate standard, the focus of punitive damages was on the malicious acts of infringers in specific cases The subjective aspects; 2 will patent infringement