Connection lost
Server error
Keurig, Incorporated v. Sturm Foods, Inc. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: Keurig sold patented coffee brewers and then sued a competitor for inducing infringement of its method patents when consumers used the competitor’s cartridges. The court held Keurig’s patent rights were exhausted by the initial sale of the brewers, giving purchasers the right to use them freely.
Legal Significance: Clarifies that the authorized sale of a patented apparatus exhausts not only the apparatus claims but also associated method claims covering the apparatus’s intended use, preventing patentees from using method claims to control post-sale use of the patented product.
Keurig, Incorporated v. Sturm Foods, Inc. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Keurig, Inc. manufactures and sells patented single-serve coffee brewers and owns patents covering both the brewer apparatus and the method of using the brewer to make a beverage. The asserted method claims describe a sequence of piercing a disposable cartridge and brewing. Sturm Foods, Inc. manufactures and sells disposable beverage cartridges compatible with Keurig’s brewers but does not make or sell brewers itself. Keurig sued Sturm, alleging that consumers who use Sturm’s cartridges in Keurig’s brewers directly infringe Keurig’s method claims, and that Sturm is therefore liable for induced and contributory infringement. Keurig did not assert its apparatus claims, acknowledging that its rights in the brewers themselves were exhausted upon their authorized sale to consumers. Sturm raised the affirmative defense of patent exhaustion, arguing that the unconditional sale of the patented brewers terminated all of Keurig’s patent rights associated with those brewers, including the method claims. The district court granted summary judgment for Sturm.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the authorized, unconditional sale of a patented apparatus that practices a patented method exhaust the patentee’s right to assert infringement of the method claims against a third party who sells consumable components for use with the apparatus?
Yes. The court affirmed summary judgment for Sturm, holding that Keurig’s patent Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla paria
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the authorized, unconditional sale of a patented apparatus that practices a patented method exhaust the patentee’s right to assert infringement of the method claims against a third party who sells consumable components for use with the apparatus?
Conclusion
This case reinforces the strength of the patent exhaustion doctrine, confirming that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in vo
Legal Rule
The initial authorized sale of a patented item terminates all patent rights Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate ve
Legal Analysis
The court distinguished this case from the Supreme Court's decisions in *Quanta Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisc
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- The authorized, unconditional sale of a patented apparatus exhausts the patentee’s