SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Summer Interns

IP-Watch interns talk about their Geneva experience in summer 2013. 2:42.

Inside Views

Submit ideas to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch!

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

The Politicization Of The US Patent System

The Washington Post story, How patent reform’s fraught politics have left USPTO still without a boss (July 30), is a vivid account of how patent reform has divided the US economy, preempting a possible replacement for David Kappos who stepped down 18 months ago. The division is even bigger than portrayed. Universities have lined up en masse to oppose reform, while main street businesses that merely use technology argue for reform. Reminiscent of the partisan divide that has paralyzed US politics, this struggle crosses party lines and extends well beyond the usual inter-industry debates. Framed in terms of combating patent trolls through technical legal fixes, there lurks a broader economic concern – to what extent ordinary retailers, bank, restaurants, local banks, motels, realtors, and travel agents should bear the burden of defending against patents as a cost of doing business.


Latest Comments
  • So this is how we mankind will become extinct? No ... »
  • 'Business methods were generally not patentable in... »

  • For IPW Subscribers

    A directory of IP delegates in Geneva. Read more>

    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >


    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >

    Inside Views
    Inside Views: How To Respond To A Cease & Desist Letter

    Published on 21 October 2011 @ 2:58 pm

    Disclaimer: the views expressed in this column are solely those of the authors and are not associated with Intellectual Property Watch. IP-Watch expressly disclaims and refuses any responsibility or liability for the content, style or form of any posts made to this forum, which remain solely the responsibility of their authors.

    Intellectual Property Watch

    By Shannon M. Vittengl

    US companies are generally known to be much more litigious than non-US companies. Thus, if you are a non-US company looking to enter the US market, it is prudent to understand the nuances of responding to a cease and desist letter.

    While cease and desist letters can be upsetting and sometimes confusing, there are a series of steps that companies can take to be better prepared in the event that they do receive one. By taking a closer look at the risk involved in a cease and desist letter, companies can better assess the strategies to deal with them.

    Evaluating the Risk

    A cease and desist letter is written by a patent owner, identifies one or more patents, and alleges that one or more parties is infringing the patent. The letter may identify a product or service that the patent owner believes is infringing their patent, and it often demands that you stop selling the product or service. Typically, the letter also requests information regarding your prior sales and demands a payment.

    As an initial matter, before stressing about the cease and desist letter you just received, first look more closely at the US patents identified in the letter. If you are well versed in US patent law, review the patent’s claims (the numbered sentences at the end of the patent that define its scope), or ask your legal counsel to do so. In particular, take a look at the independent claims (those that do not depend upon a previous claim). If your product clearly does not include at least one limitation recited in each of the independent claims, the product does not infringe the patent. Remember that the scope of a US patent may differ from a corresponding patent that issued in another country. Thus, even if you are familiar with the claim scope of, for example, a European patent, that does not mean that you are familiar with the claim scope of the corresponding US patent.

    This exercise may become more complex if you have an extensive line of products/services and/or there are many patents identified in the cease and desist letter. If you are not well versed in patent law, it is important to involve your legal counsel to help interpret the scope of the claims. However, sometimes the patent owner has not done their homework before sending such a letter, and the issue may be quickly resolved by responding to the letter with a simple explanation why your product clearly falls outside the scope of its patent.

    Often, a more lengthy review of the patent and its file history is required to assess the scope of the claims. Before you jump in, it may be wise to make a rough estimate of your potential exposure to the patent. First, evaluate your product line and assess how many products might be relevant to the patent identified. Make sure to look at both current and upcoming product lines.

    Second, roughly estimate what the possible damages could be if any potentially relevant product of yours infringes the patent. A patent owner may specify a reasonable royalty rate in its letter, which often varies by industry.

    Also, determine whether the patent owner sells the product covered by the patent, and, if so, find out whether it has been marking its product with the patent number. Under US law, if the product is unmarked, the US patent owner is only entitled to collect damages from you that occur after it has put you on notice of the patent (e.g., the day you receive the cease and desist letter), decreasing your exposure. If the US patent owner has been marking its product with the patent number, it would be entitled to collect damages from you based on your past sales.

    If your exposure to the patent is relatively low, a preliminary investigation into the patent may be all that is needed. In other words, if you are already phasing the product out of your US product line, or if you have a relatively low volume of sales in the US, it may not make economic sense to go launch a potentially expensive full investigation of the patent.

    Defensive Strategies

    Once you have a preliminary assessment of the scope of the US patent and your potential exposure to it, consider your options. If there is no clear case of non-infringement that would make the patent owner concede, there are several defensive strategies to contemplate.

    First, to more clearly fall outside of the scope of the patent, consider whether you can design around the patent. If you can alter your product to avoid the patent, then the patent owner would not be entitled to obtain royalties from you on any future sales of your new product. Depending upon the specific design, your legal counsel should review the patent file history to be sure the new design avoids the patent.

    Second, you may want to consider whether it would be in your interest to license the patent if it is not easy to design around. This may be one approach to reaching a quick resolution, and it may be desirable to a patent owner who is simply looking to monetize the patent. If you are able to reach a favorable license agreement with the patent owner, the outcome may be far cheaper than patent litigation.

    Third, check to see if you are indemnified by another party. For example, if your potentially infringing product is made of several components which you source from other companies, your agreement with those other companies may include an indemnification clause which would hold the other company liable in a patent dispute if the dispute concerned its component. In this case, the other company may be obligated to assume responsibility for any payment to the patent owner. If your current agreements with sourcing partners do not include an indemnification clause, you may want to consider adding one.

    Fourth, another approach may be to do nothing and wait to see how the patent owner responds. This is a more common approach at a large company that receives many cease and desist letters, and it can sometimes weed out the serious patent owners from the rest. Even though the patent owner sent the cease and desist letter, it may not have the desire – or budget – to fight it out in court. If the patent owner is hoping for a quick monetary settlement, a wait and see approach may cause it either to look deeper into its pockets, or to retreat. The risk of this approach, of course, is that the US patent owner may file a lawsuit before you are given the opportunity to resolve the issue outside of court.

    Offensive Strategies

    The above-mentioned defensive strategies may help to shield you from future issues concerning the patent. Also consider offensive strategies which you may be able to use to be proactive against the patent owner.

    First, if you have a legitimate reason for why you do not infringe the patent, consider filing a Declaratory Judgment of non-infringement. This brings the matter into court, but allows you to pick a more desirable venue. In the alternative, if you wait for the US patent owner to sue you for infringement, you may wind up in a less convenient location. This option may be less desirable if you want to avoid litigation at all costs, but it may be a good option to resolve the matter if the issue is negatively affecting your business.

    Second, conduct a prior art search to attempt to invalidate the patent. When a US patent application is examined at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the Examiner conducts a search of the prior art, and a patent will only issue if the claims are patentable in view of the prior art uncovered. However, if you are able to locate prior art that invalidates one or more of the claims in the patent, you now have the upper hand. You could choose to file a Declaratory Judgment to attempt to invalidate the patent in court in view of this newly discovered prior art. Alternatively, you could request a reexamination of the patent at the USPTO. Furthermore, you could decide to reveal the “smoking gun” prior art to the patent owner in the hopes it will cause the patent owner to retreat for fear you will take action and file either a Declaratory Judgment or a request for reexamination.

    Third, review your own patent portfolio for ways to strike back. It would be quite helpful if you had patents you could assert against the patent owner and/or you had pending patent applications which could be revised to cover the patent owner’s products.

    Fourth, consider whether you have any counterclaims you could assert against the US patent owner. For example, knowingly or recklessly making false accusations of patent infringement is actionable in the United States.

    In sum, receiving a cease and desist letter will never be considered a pleasant experience. However, after evaluating the risk and considering both defensive and offensive strategies, you will have armed yourself with a plan of attack, making the next cease and desist letter easier to navigate.


    Shannon Vittengl is an attorney in the mechanical technologies group at the intellectual property law firm of Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. in Boston, Massachusetts (US). She can be reached at svittengl@wolfgreenfield.com or 617-646-8297.

     

    Comments

    1. HTC 'Very Open' to Further Acquisitions | Patent says:

      [...] How Cease & Desist Letter A cease and desist letter is written by a patent owner, identifies one or more patents, and alleges that one or more parties is infringing the patent. The letter may identify a product or service that the patent owner believes is infringing their … Read more on Intellectual Property Watch (blog) [...]

    2. GDC Online 2011 In Four Words: Graeme Devine is Right says:

      [...] How To Respond To A Cease & Desist Letter This may be one approach to reaching a quick resolution, and it may be desirable to a patent owner who is simply looking to monetize the patent. If you are able to reach a favorable license agreement with the patent owner, the outcome may be far … Read more on Intellectual Property Watch (blog) [...]

    3. The Business Method Versus Traditional Patents says:

      […] be available is ultimately up to the court, but in some instances a company might be ordered to ‘cease and desist’ infringing upon the patent that was […]


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

     

     
    Your IP address is 54.90.42.156