# Patent Litigator

> Patent litigation updates for lawyers, businesses, and interested readers. Coverage of complaints, Federal Circuit decisions, and ITC proceedings.

Patent litigation commentary for lawyers, businesses, and interested readers: infringement filings, Federal Circuit decisions, ITC actions, and PTAB matters.

The board and analysis pages are entry points to this site's commentary. The court, agency, and patent records linked in articles provide the primary documents. Cite a specific article URL for commentary and the underlying document for the public record. Check publication and update dates before describing a case's current status.

## Primary pages

- [Home / daily board](https://patentlitigator.com/): Fresh filings and decisions
- [Updates](https://patentlitigator.com/#updates): Later moves on watched matters
- [Topics](https://patentlitigator.com/#topics): Doctrine and FAQ entry points (marking, Rule 36, dual-track ITC, Fintiv, willfulness, sued FAQ)
- [Notable holdings (Sep 2026)](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/notable-holdings-2026-09/): Cite-friendly monthly roundup of decisions and filings on this site
- [What moved](https://patentlitigator.com/#moved): Recent developments in cases covered on the site
- [Willfulness](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/willfulness/): Enhanced damages under section 284 after Halo
- [Fintiv](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/fintiv/): Discretionary denial of IPR institution with parallel district or ITC cases
- [Case tracker](https://patentlitigator.com/#tracker): Selected matters with notes
- [Analysis index](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/): Full case write-ups
- [FAQ hub](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq/): Practical patent litigation guides
- [Patent marking](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/patent-marking/): Section 287 notice and licensee marking
- [Rule 36](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/rule-36/): Federal Circuit affirmance without opinion
- [Dual-track ITC + district](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/dual-track-itc/): Parallel import and damages campaigns
- [About](https://patentlitigator.com/about/): What this site is and how to cite it
- [Contact](https://patentlitigator.com/contact/): Consult requests
- [RSS feed](https://patentlitigator.com/feed.xml)
- [Sitemap](https://patentlitigator.com/sitemap.xml)

## FAQ guides

- [I received an order to show cause in my patent application or issued patent. What are the next steps?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-order-to-show-cause/): An order to show cause is a demand that you explain, by a set deadline, why the USPTO or a court should not take a stated action. Do not ignore it. Identify who issued it, calendar the exact response date, preserve the papers, and get a registered practitioner or litigation counsel involved before you file. This page is general commentary, not legal advice for your facts.
- [What is a design-patent damages (article of manufacture) fight?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-design-patent-damages/): Design-patent damages can include the infringer's total profit on the relevant article of manufacture under 35 U.S.C. 289. For a product with several components, identifying that article is a separate question from calculating its profit.
- [What is FRAND or SEP, and how is that different from a normal patent suit?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-frand-sep/): A standard-essential patent is one whose claimed invention is needed to practice a technical standard. A declaration to a standards body is a starting point for investigation, not proof that a product infringes. FRAND describes a commitment to license on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms.
- [What if the patent suit also alleges trade-secret theft?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-trade-secret-with-patent/): A complaint can allege both patent infringement and trade-secret misappropriation, but the claims require different proof. Identify the patent claims separately from the information the plaintiff says was secret and improperly acquired or used.
- [What is an inventorship dispute or correction of inventorship?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-inventorship-dispute/): An inventorship dispute concerns who contributed to the conception of the claimed invention. Section 256 provides ways to correct inventorship on an issued patent. Its current text does not require an absence of deceptive intent.
- [What happens to a patent case in bankruptcy?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-patent-case-bankruptcy/): A bankruptcy filing can change whether a patent case or collection effort may proceed. The first questions are who filed, what relief is being pursued, and whether the automatic stay or a bankruptcy-court order applies.
- [What should I do if Amazon freezes my listing over a patent?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-amazon-listing-frozen-patent/): Start with the notice Amazon actually sent. Save its attachments and deadlines, identify the patent and affected listings, and establish which process is being used before choosing a response.
- [My competitor sent a cease and desist. Is that different from a patent owner notice?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-competitor-sent-cease-desist/): A competitor's patent letter requires the same initial claim analysis as another owner's letter. The commercial relationship may affect your priorities, but it does not prove infringement or entitle the sender to an injunction.
- [How much does a patent infringement case usually cost?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-how-much-does-patent-case-cost/): Patent cases are among the more expensive commercial disputes because of claim construction, experts, discovery, and parallel PTAB or ITC work. Published industry surveys often show defense or assertion costs rising from the low six figures for early exits into seven figures or more through trial, with wide variance by stakes, district, and counsel model. Treat any number as a planning range, not a quote.
- [Do I need patent litigation insurance, and what does it cover?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-patent-litigation-insurance/): Check the actual policy before assuming patent litigation is covered. Specialty intellectual-property insurance exists, but the insured risks, exclusions, limits, and notice requirements depend on the contract.
- [What is litigation finance or a third-party funder in a patent case?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-litigation-finance/): Third-party litigation funding can pay legal fees or expenses in exchange for a financial return. The agreement matters: review how proceeds are divided, who controls decisions, and what must be disclosed in the court hearing the case.
- [What is a bond for a preliminary injunction?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-preliminary-injunction-bond/): A preliminary-injunction bond is security associated with temporary relief, not a payment establishing that the patent owner has won. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c) addresses the amount and purpose of that security.
- [What is a consent judgment with a covenant not to sue?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-consent-judgment-covenant/): A consent judgment, a license, and a covenant not to sue do different work. Read the signed terms and proposed court order together to understand what is resolved, what future conduct is covered, and how a dispute would be enforced.
- [Can I keep selling during an appeal?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-sell-during-appeal/): An appeal does not by itself authorize continued sales. First identify the order in force: a money judgment, a district-court injunction, and an ITC exclusion order require different analysis.
- [How do attorneys fees under section 285 really get awarded?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-attorneys-fees-285/): Winning a patent case does not automatically shift attorney fees. Under 35 U.S.C. 285, a court may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in an exceptional case.
- [What is a walk-away settlement vs a license?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-walk-away-vs-license/): A walk-away settlement and a license answer different questions. Compare the written treatment of past claims, future sales, covered products, customers, and enforcement before deciding which arrangement resolves the business problem.
- [Can I submit prior art against a competitor's pending patent application?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-third-party-submission/): A third-party preissuance submission lets a person present certain documents for the USPTO to consider in a pending patent application. It is a limited examination procedure with a statutory deadline, not an infringement ruling or a challenge to an issued patent.
- [What is the on-sale bar, and how can old sales affect a patent?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-on-sale-bar/): Commercial activity before a patent filing can affect patentability. An on-sale analysis requires the dates, the proposed transaction, the claimed invention, and the applicable version of section 102; the fact that a product existed earlier is not a complete analysis.
- [We solve the same problem with a different design. Does that mean we do not infringe?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-same-problem-different-design/): Solving the same problem does not by itself establish infringement. For a utility patent, compare the asserted claim limitations with the product. For a design patent, the claimed appearance requires a different analysis.
- [Does it matter whether the letter asserts a design patent or a utility patent?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-design-vs-utility-letter/): Identify whether the letter asserts a utility patent, a design patent, or both. The type of patent changes the comparison you need to make and can affect the requested damages.
- [What is a Rule 408 settlement meeting after a patent notice letter?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-408-settlement-meeting/): Federal Rule of Evidence 408 limits certain uses of settlement evidence. It does not make every conversation labeled settlement confidential, privileged, or unusable for every purpose.
- [If I keep selling after notice, does that automatically mean willful infringement?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-continue-selling-after-notice/): A notice letter is a reason to investigate, not a finding of infringement. Deciding whether to continue selling requires a claim analysis, review of any operative order, and consideration of the commercial alternatives.
- [What is Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (APEX), and how does it work?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-amazon-neutral-patent-evaluation/): Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) is a marketplace process for utility-patent disputes using a neutral evaluator. Confirm the current agreement and notice for the dispute before relying on any eligibility rule, fee, or deadline.
- [Why does Amazon or eBay want a court order before removing a listing for patent infringement?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-amazon-wants-court-order/): A marketplace may ask for particular documents under the process being used. A request for a court order should be read against that process; it does not, by itself, establish whether the patent claim is strong or weak.
- [Can I get a marketplace listing taken down for patent infringement without filing a lawsuit?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-platform-takedown-without-suit/): Some marketplaces provide patent-reporting or evaluation procedures outside a lawsuit. Use the process actually offered for the asserted right and listing; the platform decision and any court proceeding need separate review.
- [How do I enforce a U.S. patent against foreign sellers on Amazon?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-foreign-sellers-amazon/): A seller's location outside the United States does not answer whether its conduct falls within U.S. patent law. Review the relevant sales and imports, the platform notice, and any court or agency proceeding separately.
- [Should I give sales numbers if a cease-and-desist letter asks for them?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-c-and-d-asks-for-sales/): A demand for sales information calls for a deliberate response. Identify whether it is a private request, a discovery request, a subpoena, or a contractual obligation before sending confidential business records.
- [What if I am a small seller and cannot afford a full patent fight?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-small-business-cant-afford-fight/): Start by buying clarity about the patent, product, and deadline. A limited first review can help a small business compare a response, negotiated resolution, redesign, or defense without assuming that any option is inexpensive or certain to succeed.
- [What is a bad-faith patent demand letter, and what can targets do about it?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-bad-faith-demand-letter/): A mistaken or aggressive patent demand does not automatically establish bad faith. Separate verifiable errors from conclusions about motive, and have counsel evaluate the law that applies to any proposed response or claim.
- [Do I have to stop selling if I get a patent infringement letter?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-must-i-stop-selling/): A private patent demand is not itself an injunction. Whether continued sales are lawful and prudent depends on the patent claims, the product, any authorization, and any court or agency order already in force.
- [Should I ask the patent owner for a claim chart?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-ask-for-claim-chart/): A claim chart is a structured explanation of how an asserted patent claim allegedly matches a product or process. Asking for one can clarify a utility-patent demand, but the request does not replace your own review or suspend a real deadline.
- [What if the patent owner refuses to send a claim chart and wants a meeting instead?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-they-wont-send-claim-chart/): A refusal to provide a claim chart leaves an information gap; it does not decide infringement. Record what is missing, investigate the available patent and product evidence, and keep any formal deadline separate.
- [Can someone sue me or force a takedown based on a provisional patent application?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-provisional-cease-desist/): A provisional application is not an issued patent and does not by itself create a right to sue for patent infringement. Check the filing number, any related issued patents, and the particular platform process before responding to a demand.
- [Can I be sued for selling a product that is only "patent pending"?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-patent-pending-product/): Patent pending describes an application stage, not an issued patent right. A product label or application number should be checked against the actual application, its publication status, and any patent that has issued.
- [What if I get an infringement letter but I think the patent is expired?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-expired-patent-letter/): Expiration and the dates of the accused activity are separate questions. An expired patent generally cannot cover new acts after its term, but a demand may concern infringement that allegedly occurred while the patent was in force.
- [What is the doctrine of equivalents, and how does it change infringement analysis?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-doctrine-of-equivalents/): The doctrine of equivalents can reach some differences between an accused product and a patent claim that defeat literal infringement. It is an element-by-element inquiry with legal limits, not a general rule that similar products infringe.
- [Should I call the other side's lawyer myself after a patent notice?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-should-i-call-their-lawyer/): Before a direct call, decide what you need to learn and who should speak for the business. A prepared conversation or written request can help obtain the patent, product, and deadline information without improvising technical or settlement positions.
- [FAQ Hub: Practical Guides for Patent Work](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq/): Practical guides to patent notices, lawsuits, Patent Office challenges, ITC proceedings, litigation costs, and related questions. These guides are general commentary, not legal advice, and do not create an attorney-client relationship.
- [FAQ: Drafting Patent Applications from Recent Federal Circuit Opinions](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-drafting-from-fed-cir/): Practical lessons from recent Federal Circuit opinions. Each answer has three parts: what the court held, what you should do when you draft, and a simple bad-vs-better example. This is commentary, not legal advice.
- [FAQ: What to Ask Inventors Before You Draft](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-what-to-ask-inventors/): Simple interview questions that help you gather the facts recent Federal Circuit cases show you need. Use the core list every time. Add the extra modules when they fit the technology.
- [FAQ: Litigation Practice from Recent Cases on This Board](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-litigation-practice/): Practical answers about courtroom and ITC timing issues from recent public cases on this site. Each answer says what happened, then what it means in practice. This is commentary, not legal advice.
- [FAQ: You've Been Sued for Patent Infringement](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-sued-for-patent-infringement/): First steps, typical district-court timelines, and the questions new defendants and in-house counsel ask most often. This is general commentary for readers with little patent-litigation experience, not legal advice, and it does not promise any result.
- [I received a notice letter alleging I am infringing a patent. What are my next steps?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-notice-letter-next-steps/): Do not ignore the letter. Preserve it, calendar any response date it states, map the patents and accused products, and get patent counsel involved before you reply or redesign in a hurry. This page is general commentary, not legal advice for your facts.
- [I just got sued for patent infringement in federal court. What happens next?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-sued-in-district-court/): Calendar the response deadline, hire patent counsel for that court, issue a litigation hold, and map the patents and accused products before you talk to the other side. The longer sued FAQ on this site covers the deep Q&A; this page is the short "what happens next" path.
- [Should I challenge the patent at the PTAB (IPR/PGR)?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-should-i-go-to-ptab/): Compare the proposed grounds, filing deadlines, institution risks, cost, and estoppel before choosing a Patent Office challenge.
- [My customer got a patent notice about my product. What should I do?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-indemnity-customer/): When a customer receives a patent notice about your product, obtain the notice and the governing contracts promptly. Coordinate the factual review while counsel determines who has any duty to defend, indemnify, or notify another party.
- [I was named in an ITC patent investigation. How is that different from district court?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-itc-complaint/): A section 337 investigation targets unfair imports and exclusion-style remedies on a compressed clock. It is not a damages courtroom, response duties under 19 CFR 210.13 are real, and default under 1337(g) can produce an order limited to a nonparticipating respondent.
- [Do I have to respond to a patent notice letter?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-must-i-respond-notice/): A private patent notice does not itself start the federal deadline for answering a complaint. Still, record the requested date, preserve the letter, and investigate whether a response or another action is appropriate.
- [How long do I have before the patent owner can sue me?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-how-long-before-suit/): A patent owner can often sue as soon as it believes it has a good-faith infringement claim, subject to ownership, standing, and pleading rules. There is no universal grace period after a notice letter, though marking and damages rules can still affect how far back money can reach.
- [What is a Paragraph IV notice letter in a drug case?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-paragraph-iv-notice/): In Hatch-Waxman practice, a Paragraph IV certification tells the brand that the ANDA applicant seeks approval before patent expiry on the theory that listed patents are invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed. The notice letter triggers a short window in which the brand often sues and may start a 30-month stay of FDA approval.
- [Can ignoring a notice letter lead to willful infringement?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-notice-willfulness/): Receiving a patent notice can matter to knowledge, but it does not establish willful infringement or make enhanced damages automatic. Willfulness and the court's decision whether to increase damages are separate questions.
- [Should I get a formal opinion of counsel?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-opinion-of-counsel/): A legal opinion can organize a reasoned analysis of infringement, validity, or enforceability. Whether to obtain one depends on the decision you need to make; patent law does not impose a general requirement to buy an opinion after a notice.
- [What is a design-around, and when does it help?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-design-around/): A design-around changes a product or process to avoid the asserted patent claims. Start with the relevant claim limitations and verify the revised product, including any equivalents theory, before assuming that a change removes infringement risk.
- [When does an indemnification clause cover a patent claim?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-indemnification-clause/): Start with the signed contract and the law that governs it. A supplier promise to cover patent claims may have limits on covered products, notice, defense costs, and settlement authority.
- [Can I file a declaratory judgment action instead of waiting to be sued?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-declaratory-judgment/): A declaratory-judgment action can ask a court to resolve a real patent dispute before the patent owner sues. A concrete controversy, jurisdiction, venue, and the effect on other challenges all need attention.
- [What is an IPR, and how is it different from district court?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-what-is-ipr/): Inter partes review challenges patent claims at the Patent Office using patents or printed publications. It addresses a narrower set of issues than an infringement lawsuit.
- [What is reexamination, and when would I use it instead of IPR?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-reexamination/): Ex parte reexamination asks the Patent Office to reconsider patent claims using patents or printed publications. Compare its limited requester participation with the deadlines and estoppel associated with IPR.
- [Can I stay the district court case if I file at the PTAB?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-stay-pending-ptab/): An IPR petition does not automatically pause an existing infringement lawsuit. The judge generally decides whether a stay would simplify the case without unfair prejudice.
- [What happens if the patent owner also files at the ITC?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-owner-also-files-itc/): An ITC complaint beside your district case adds a compressed import-remedy track. Calendar the 19 CFR 210.13 response deadline, consider a timely 28 U.S.C. 1659 stay, and coordinate positions across forums.
- [How do I pick venue, or fight the venue the plaintiff chose?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-venue-fight/): Patent venue asks whether the infringement action belongs in the chosen district. A request to transfer an otherwise proper case for convenience is a separate question.
- [What is claim construction, and why does it matter so early?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-claim-construction/): Claim construction determines the meaning of disputed patent language. That meaning supplies the framework for comparing the claims with accused products and prior art.
- [What discovery should I expect in a patent case?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-discovery-patent-case/): Discovery gathers evidence about the claims, defenses, and damages. Rule 26 limits it to relevant, nonprivileged material that is proportional to the needs of the case.
- [What is an injunction, and how likely is one?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-injunction-likelihood/): An injunction directs a party to do or stop specified conduct. A finding of patent infringement does not automatically produce a permanent injunction, and early relief has its own requirements.
- [How are patent damages usually calculated?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-how-damages-calculated/): Patent damages compensate for proven infringement. Section 284 provides a reasonable-royalty floor; lost profits require evidence of the profits the owner would have earned without the infringement.
- [What is enhanced damages, and how do I reduce that risk?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-enhanced-damages-risk/): Enhanced damages are a discretionary increase in compensatory patent damages, up to three times under section 284. An accusation of willfulness is not itself an award.
- [Should I settle early, and what does a typical patent license look like?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-settle-early-license/): Early settlement is a business decision informed by the patent claims, available defenses, likely expense, and the agreement's scope. There is no standard patent license that fits every dispute.
- [What if I am only a customer or reseller, not the manufacturer?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-customer-reseller/): Using or selling a product can create patent exposure even when someone else made it. Supplier contracts, an authorized sale, and the precise accusation should be examined separately.
- [What if the patent looks invalid from old publications or products?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-invalidity-prior-art/): Older technology may matter, but dates, public availability, and the precise claim limitations must be proved. District-court defenses and Patent Office proceedings do not accept exactly the same grounds.
- [What is inequitable conduct, and when does it come up?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-inequitable-conduct/): Inequitable conduct is a defense seeking to prevent enforcement because of material misconduct before the Patent Office coupled with specific intent to deceive. An omitted reference alone does not establish it.
- [How do ANDA / Hatch-Waxman timelines and the 30-month stay work?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-anda-30-month-stay/): A qualifying, timely patent suit after Paragraph IV notice can delay final FDA approval of an abbreviated new drug application. The statutory approval stay is not a court injunction or a decision on infringement.
- [What is a consent judgment, and when is it used?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-consent-judgment/): A consent judgment is an order entered by the court on agreed terms. It should identify precisely what is resolved and what, if anything, the parties must do afterward.
- [What should in-house counsel put in a litigation hold after a patent notice?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-litigation-hold/): A litigation hold is a preservation process for information relevant to anticipated or pending litigation. Identify the people, systems, and product versions involved, then make sure preservation instructions are implemented.
- [When should I send a notice letter instead of filing suit right away?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-when-to-send-notice/): A notice letter may open a licensing discussion or provide relevant infringement notice. Decide what the letter should accomplish and evaluate its jurisdictional and damages consequences before sending it.
- [What should a good notice letter include?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-good-notice-letter/): A useful patent notice identifies the patent, the activity being challenged, and the requested response. It should distinguish supported facts from allegations and make the proposed next step clear.
- [How do I choose between district court and the ITC?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-choose-district-or-itc/): Choose district court when you need damages or an Article III injunction. Choose the ITC when you need import leverage on a fast statutory clock and can meet domestic industry. Many owners use both.
- [Can I sue in both district court and the ITC at the same time?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-sue-both-forums/): Yes. Owners often run district damages cases beside ITC section 337 complaints. Expect different remedies, a possible mandatory district stay under 28 U.S.C. 1659, and naming strategy driven by Kyocera.
- [How do I pick the best venue for a patent case?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-pick-venue-plaintiff/): Start with districts permitted by the patent venue statute. Then assess whether the chosen district can keep and manage the case, including any convenience-transfer request.
- [Which claims should I assert first?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-which-claims-assert/): Choose claims that the available evidence can support against identified products. Record the claim-by-claim theory and check the court's disclosure and amendment rules before treating other claims as later fallbacks.
- [Do I need to mark my products to get pre-suit damages?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-marking-presuit-damages/): For patented articles subject to section 287(a), marking and actual notice can determine the start of recoverable damages. Sales by authorized licensees belong in that analysis even when the patent owner sells no product itself.
- [What evidence do I need before filing a complaint?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-evidence-before-complaint/): Investigate the patent, ownership, accused activity, and each proposed infringement theory before filing. Rule 11 requires a reasonable inquiry; discovery is not a substitute for a supported starting position.
- [What is a preliminary injunction, and when is it realistic?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-preliminary-injunction/): A preliminary injunction seeks relief before final judgment. It requires a supported showing of likely success, likely irreparable harm, favorable equities, and the public interest.
- [How do I plead willfulness without overreaching?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-plead-willfulness/): Support a willfulness allegation with the particular facts and timing you can responsibly allege. Keep that pleading question separate from whether the judge should later enhance damages.
- [What happens if the defendant files an IPR against my patent?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-defendant-filed-ipr/): An IPR petition begins a request for Patent Office review; it is not a finding that the patent is invalid. Review the asserted grounds, service history, response deadlines, and the effect on any court case.
- [How does Fintiv discretionary denial affect my district court case?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-fintiv-affects-my-case/): The Director decides whether to begin an IPR or PGR under current USPTO practice. Discretionary denial and a district-court stay are separate decisions; neither institution outcome determines infringement or damages.
- [Should I offer a license before suing?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-offer-license-before-suit/): A licensing proposal can test whether a business resolution is possible, but it should follow an assessment of the patent position, notice consequences, and possible litigation response.
- [How do damages, royalties, and lost profits usually work?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-damages-royalties-lost-profits/): Damages should match the loss attributable to infringement. A patent owner should distinguish a reasonable-royalty theory from a lost-profits theory and assemble evidence for the chosen measure.
- [What is an exclusion order at the ITC?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-itc-exclusion-order/): An exclusion order directs U.S. Customs and Border Protection to stop covered infringing articles at the border. A limited exclusion order (LEO) targets articles of named respondents. A general exclusion order (GEO) can reach infringing articles of non-respondents when 19 U.S.C. 1337(d)(2) is satisfied.
- [How do I handle a multi-defendant campaign?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-multi-defendant-campaign/): Multiple defendants create separate questions about joinder, venue, product proof, schedules, and settlement scope. A shared patent does not by itself justify putting every accused company into one action.
- [What if the accused product changed after my notice letter?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-product-changed-after-notice/): A redesigned product needs its own comparison with the asserted claims. Keep the original and revised versions separate, along with the dates and sales associated with each.
- [How do Orange Book listing and Hatch-Waxman suits work for brand owners?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-orange-book-brand/): Orange Book patent submissions and Hatch-Waxman litigation are related but distinct tasks. List eligible patents accurately, evaluate each Paragraph IV notice, and calculate the applicable litigation and FDA dates.
- [When should I amend infringement contentions?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-amend-infringement-contentions/): Act promptly when new evidence or claim construction changes an infringement theory. Whether amendment is allowed depends on the court's patent rules and scheduling order.
- [What settlement structures are common (lump sum, running royalty, covenant not to sue)?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-settlement-structures/): A patent settlement can combine payment, permission for future activity, release of past claims, and dismissal. The right structure is the one whose scope and enforcement terms match the agreement reached.
- [What is the typical timeline of a patent case from complaint to trial?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-typical-timeline/): There is no single nationwide complaint-to-trial timetable for patent cases. Use the assigned court's scheduling order and patent rules to identify milestones, and revisit the calendar when the court changes it.
- [What is a Markman / claim construction hearing?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-markman-hearing/): A Markman hearing is a proceeding about the meaning of disputed patent claims. The judge decides construction, using the patent record and any properly considered evidence.
- [What is summary judgment in a patent case?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-summary-judgment-patent/): Summary judgment resolves a claim or issue when there is no genuine dispute about a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. A strong argument alone is not that showing.
- [What is a consent decree vs. a dismissal?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-consent-decree-vs-dismissal/): A dismissal ends litigation as specified in the dismissal papers. A consent decree is an agreed court order that may impose continuing obligations. A private settlement is a separate agreement whose enforcement must also be considered.
- [How does appeal to the Federal Circuit work?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-appeal-federal-circuit/): The Federal Circuit reviews the categories of patent and agency decisions assigned to it by statute. Identify the appealable decision, the proper route, and the filing deadline before planning the merits brief.
- [What is Rule 36 at the Federal Circuit?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-rule-36-federal-circuit/): Federal Circuit Rule 36 permits an affirmance without an opinion when the court finds one of the listed conditions and concludes that an opinion would have no precedential value.
- [What if the patent owner does not make a product?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-npe-nonpracticing/): A patent owner does not have to manufacture a product to bring an infringement action. The merits and remedies depend on the patent rights, accused conduct, evidence, and applicable legal tests.
- [How do NDAs and common-interest privilege work when sharing prior art with co-defendants?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-nda-common-interest/): An NDA and the common-interest doctrine do different work. A confidentiality agreement does not automatically turn a public reference or business discussion into a privileged legal communication.

## Recent analysis

- [Jury Awards Taction $5.72 Billion Against Apple Over iPhone and Apple Watch Haptics.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/taction-v-apple-haptics-verdict/) (2026-09-25): On September 25, 2026, a jury in the Southern District of California found that Apple infringed claims 17 and 19 of U.S. Patent 10,659,885 and claim 16 of U.S. Patent 10,820,117, found the infringement not willful, and awarded Taction Technology $5,721,961,750. The court's minute entry records the verdict for Taction on Apple's invalidity defenses. The case, No. 3:21-cv-00812, reached trial after the Federal Circuit vacated a 2023 summary judgment for Apple. The docket does not yet show an entered judgment.
- [PowerWatch Sues Nanya on Two Expired DRAM Patents.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/powerwatch-v-nanya-dram/) (2026-09-25): On September 24, 2026, PowerWatch Systems LLC sued Nanya Technology Corporation in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, No. 2:26-cv-00871. The complaint asserts at least claim 11 of U.S. Patent 7,281,079 and at least claims 6, 7, and 8 of U.S. Patent 7,432,731 against Nanya DRAM parts. It says both patents have expired. The prayer seeks damages for past infringement.
- [Malikie Sues Crypto.com on Four Cryptography Patents.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/malikie-v-crypto-com/) (2026-09-25): On September 22, 2026, Malikie Innovations Ltd. and Key Patent Innovations Ltd. sued Foris DAX, Inc. d/b/a Crypto.com, Foris DAX Asia Pte. Ltd., and Foris Holdings KY Limited in the Eastern District of Texas, No. 2:26-cv-00864. The complaint asserts at least claim 1 of four patents covering digital signatures, a Montgomery-style reduction, a power-analysis countermeasure, and securing a communication link. Google Patents lists the '197 patent as expired on May 4, 2026. The prayer seeks an injunction on the other three.
- [Ampack Sues Hithium Over Lithium-Ion Battery Patents.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/ampack-v-hithium-bess/) (2026-09-25): On September 23, 2026, Xiamen Ampack Technology Limited sued Xiamen Hithium Energy Storage Technology Co., Ltd. in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, No. 2:26-cv-00870. The complaint asserts six patents and reproduces claim 1 of each against a Hithium 314Ah lithium iron phosphate cell, then treats that cell as representative of a broader catalog of cells, modules, and energy-storage systems. It alleges a Mesquite, Texas address for one Hithium U.S. entity.
- [ASSIA Sues Comcast Over Xfinity Wi-Fi and Network-Management Patents.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/assia-v-comcast-xfinity-wifi/) (2026-09-24): On September 23, 2026, Adaptive Spectrum and Signal Alignment, Inc. and ASSIA SPE, LLC sued four Comcast entities in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, No. 2:26-cv-00868, on seven patents the complaint says cover Xfinity's cloud Wi-Fi management, xFi Pods mesh networking, the Xfinity app, and DOCSIS 3.1 features. Five days earlier, Comcast Cable Communications, LLC filed a declaratory judgment action for noninfringement against ASSIA in the Northern District of California.
- [Linton Crystal Sues Zhejiang Jingsheng Over Crystal-Puller Seed Lifts.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/linton-crystal-v-jsg-crystal-pullers/) (2026-09-24): On September 22, 2026, Linton Crystal Technologies Corp. sued Zhejiang Jingsheng Mechanical & Electrical Co., Ltd. (JSG) in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, No. 2:26-cv-00863. The complaint asserts two patents on the seed-lift mechanism of CZ crystal-growth pullers, the machines that grow single-crystal silicon for semiconductor and solar production, and accuses JSG pullers including the TDR160P series, pointing to U.S. import records of 2024 shipments.
- [IOENGINE Sues Samsung Over Tunneling Portable-Device Patents.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/ioengine-v-samsung-tunneling/) (2026-09-24): On September 22, 2026, IOENGINE, LLC sued Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, No. 2:26-cv-00866. The complaint asserts five patents in one family, priority March 23, 2004, all titled as a tunneling client access point. It alleges that Samsung smartwatches and fitness bands, wireless earbuds, portable drives, and Galaxy smartphones borrow a larger terminal's screen, controls, or network connection, and it asks for an injunction only on the '006 patent, the one patent it pleads as unexpired.
- [ITC Institutes Willow Wearable Breast-Pump Investigation Against Anker and Others.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/itc-1522-willow-breast-pumps/) (2026-09-24): On September 21, 2026, the Commission ordered institution of Investigation No. 337-TA-1522, Certain Wearable Breast Pumps, Associated Milk Storage Containers, and Components Thereof, on a complaint Willow Innovations, Inc. and Willow Blossom HoldCo Ltd. filed August 20, 2026. The September 22 notice (published September 24) names twelve respondents, including Anker Innovations Limited, with addresses in China, Hong Kong, Malaysia, and the United States, and puts five patents into the investigation. Institution is not a merits finding.
- [UnaliWear Files ITC Complaint Over Wearable Activity and Health Monitors (DN 3937).](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/itc-dn-3937-unaliwear-wearables/) (2026-09-24): On September 21, 2026, UnaliWear, Inc. filed a section 337 complaint captioned Certain Wearable Activity and Health Monitoring Devices and Systems Containing Same, DN 3937. The Federal Register receipt notice published September 24 names Samsung, Google, and Garmin entities as proposed respondents. Receipt is not institution.
- [ITC Issues General Exclusion Order in Absorption-Refrigeration Boiler-Protection Probe.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/itc-1453-boiler-geo/) (2026-09-24): On September 21, 2026, the Commission found a section 337 violation in Investigation No. 337-TA-1453, Certain Boiler Protection for Absorption Refrigeration Systems and Components Thereof, and issued a general exclusion order plus cease and desist orders against four defaulting respondents. The Federal Register notice published September 24. The investigation is terminated.
- [Honeywell Aerospace Sues Rivian Over Driver+ and Autonomy Stack.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/honeywell-aerospace-v-rivian-autonomy/) (2026-09-23): On September 18, 2026, Honeywell Aerospace US LLC sued Rivian Automotive, LLC and Rivian Automotive, Inc. in the District of Arizona, No. 2:26-cv-06694-MTM, assigned to Magistrate Judge Michael T. Morrissey, subject to the parties' consent. The complaint asserts the same seven patents as Honeywell's same-day Eastern District of Texas suit against Lucid, this time against Rivian Gen 1 and Gen 2 vehicles running Driver+, the Rivian Autonomy Platform, and Autonomy+, and pleads willfulness after years of notice correspondence.
- [Catheter Wave Sues Shockwave Over IVL Catheter Portfolio.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/catheter-wave-v-shockwave-ivl/) (2026-09-23): On September 21, 2026, Catheter Wave Innovations LLC sued Shockwave Medical, Inc. in the District of Minnesota, No. 0:26-cv-04074-KMM-JFD. The complaint asserts six intravascular lithotripsy catheter patents against Shockwave's C2, C2+, C2 Aero, L6, M5, M5+, S4, and E8 catheters used with the Shockwave IVL Generator and Connector Cable, pleads willfulness on 2021 to 2023 SanuWave correspondence and an unanswered 2026 acquisition inquiry, and notes Shockwave's announced October 1, 2026 Johnson & Johnson MedTech rebrand.
- [Honeywell Aerospace Sues Lucid Over DreamDrive ADAS Features.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/honeywell-aerospace-v-lucid-dreamdrive/) (2026-09-22): On September 18, 2026, Honeywell Aerospace US LLC sued Lucid Group, Inc. and Lucid Group USA, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas, No. 2:26-cv-00841, before Judge Rodney Gilstrap. The complaint asserts seven patents against Lucid Air and Lucid Gravity vehicles running DreamDrive / DreamDrive 2 ADAS and sensor suites, and pleads willfulness after years of notice correspondence.
- [NEC Sues Anker Over eufy Cameras and Home Security Stack.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/nec-v-anker-eufy-cameras/) (2026-09-22): On September 18, 2026, NEC Corporation sued Anker Innovations Technology Co., Ltd. and Anker Innovations Ltd. d/b/a eufy in the Eastern District of Texas, No. 2:26-cv-00847. The complaint asserts six video-surveillance and image-analysis patents against the eufy camera, doorbell, HomeBase, lock, AI, app, and server stack, and pleads willfulness on every count.
- [Federal Circuit Holds Object-Level Profitability Claims Patent Ineligible.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/berkeley-ieor-v-grainger-101/) (2026-09-21): On September 21, 2026, the Federal Circuit reversed a Northern District of Illinois summary judgment of eligibility and affirmed judgment for the defendants on the alternative ground that the asserted claims of three object-level profitability patents are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. 101.
- [SF Diamond's ITC Appeal Ends by Agreement.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/sf-diamond-itc-appeal-dismissal/) (2026-09-18): A September 18 nonprecedential order dismisses the appeal from Investigation No. 337-TA-1236 and issues the mandate the same day.
- [Shionogi Sues Zydus Over Proposed Generic RADICAVA ORS.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/shionogi-v-zydus-radicava-ors/) (2026-09-18): Shionogi's September 14 complaint asserts U.S. Patent 12,599,586 against Zydus's proposed edaravone oral suspension under ANDA 220849. It asks the court to set any FDA approval date no earlier than the patent's expiration, including claimed extensions and exclusivity.
- [Frontrunner Sues Pareto Mobility Over Its Step-Free Bus.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/frontrunner-v-pareto-mobility/) (2026-09-18): Frontrunner's September 15 complaint alleges infringement of three patents covering modular vehicles and structural panels and pleads willfulness through Pareto's founder, a former Frontrunner engineering executive who is a named inventor on the asserted patents. It seeks damages, including treble damages, and injunctive relief against Pareto Mobility.
- [ITC Adds LeaperKim Coyote to the Electric-Unicycle Investigation.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/itc-1488-unicycles-leaperkim/) (2026-09-18): A Commission notice issued September 16 and published September 18 leaves in place an order adding Guangzhou Coyote d/b/a LeaperKim as a respondent. This is an amendment to an existing investigation.
- [Active Wireless ITC Investigation Ends After TCL and T-Mobile Settlement.](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/itc-1480-active-wireless-termination/) (2026-09-18): The Commission's September 15 notice, published September 18, terminates the final respondents and the investigation after leaving the ALJ's settlement-based determination unreviewed.
- [I received an order to show cause in my patent application or issued patent. What are the next steps?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-order-to-show-cause/) (2026-09-17): An order to show cause is a demand that you explain, by a set deadline, why the USPTO or a court should not take a stated action. Do not ignore it. Identify who issued it, calendar the exact response date, preserve the papers, and get a registered practitioner or litigation counsel involved before you file. This page is general commentary, not legal advice for your facts.
- [What is a design-patent damages (article of manufacture) fight?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-design-patent-damages/) (2026-09-17): Design-patent damages can include the infringer's total profit on the relevant article of manufacture under 35 U.S.C. 289. For a product with several components, identifying that article is a separate question from calculating its profit.
- [What is FRAND or SEP, and how is that different from a normal patent suit?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-frand-sep/) (2026-09-17): A standard-essential patent is one whose claimed invention is needed to practice a technical standard. A declaration to a standards body is a starting point for investigation, not proof that a product infringes. FRAND describes a commitment to license on fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory terms.
- [What if the patent suit also alleges trade-secret theft?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-trade-secret-with-patent/) (2026-09-17): A complaint can allege both patent infringement and trade-secret misappropriation, but the claims require different proof. Identify the patent claims separately from the information the plaintiff says was secret and improperly acquired or used.
- [What is an inventorship dispute or correction of inventorship?](https://patentlitigator.com/analysis/faq-inventorship-dispute/) (2026-09-17): An inventorship dispute concerns who contributed to the conception of the claimed invention. Section 256 provides ways to correct inventorship on an issued patent. Its current text does not require an absence of deceptive intent.

## Citation guidance

- Use facts as stated on the page (parties, court, number, date, patents, products).
- Do not invent patents, holdings, or docket details.
- Commentary is general information, not legal advice; see the attorney-advertising disclaimer on each page.