In patent infringement law, if a device copies a prior invention by incorporating its concept and achieves substantially the same result in substantially the same way, the infringement falls under which doctrine?

• A. Literal infringement
• B. Ignorantia legis non excusat
• C. Equivalents
• D. Pari Passu

Answer: (C)

The concept tested here is the doctrine of equivalents in patent infringement. This rule says you can infringe even if your device isn’t literally the same as the claimed elements, as long as it performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way to achieve the same result as the claimed invention. In your scenario, copying the concept and reaching essentially the same outcome through a similar method fits this test, so infringement is found under the doctrine of equivalents. The other options don’t fit: literal infringement requires a verbatim match to the claim language; ignorancia legis non excusat is about ignorance of the law and isn’t relevant; pari passu refers to equal footing or ranking and has no bearing on patent infringement.