• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patent
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Application
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademark
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
        • How to respond to an office action?
        • Request for non-publication of a patent application
        • Anatomy of a Patent Document
        • How to write a broad patent application?
        • Design patents: pros and cons
      • Patent costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • Worldwide patents
        • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
        • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
      • Responding to Office Actions
        • Overview of Office Actions
      • Trademarks
        • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
        • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
        • How to select a trademark?
          • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent Infringements / CAFC defines competitive injury for false patent marking

CAFC defines competitive injury for false patent marking

August 10, 2015 by James Yang

CompetitiveInuryIn order to unfairly deter competition, companies would falsely mark a product as “patent pending” or even place a patent number on the product when no patent application or patent existed. This is referred to as false patent marking.  Sometimes companies would make an innocent mistake and falsely mark their products as patent protected. Click here for proper usage of patent marking.

Under the current law, false patent marking claims can only be brought by anyone who suffers a competitive injury.  It used to be that anyone, even if that person was not harmed by the false marking, could bring a false patent marking claim against the company that falsely marked its products with an incorrect patent number.  Additionally, recent case law has held that anyone bringing a false patent marking claim could obtain damage award up to $500 for each falsely marked product.  Many people looked at these false marking claims as a fast way to make (or extort) money.   As a result, a flurry of false patent marking claims arose against companies even though there may not have been any harm to anyone.  Many labeled these lawsuits as frivolous, and when large companies began to be sued for billions of dollars in potential damages for not removing expired patents from their product packaging, Congress was lobbied to change the law.  One of the resulting changes was to limit damages for false patent marking to those who suffer a competitive injury.

The competitive injury requirement is fairly new and was ushered into law under the America Invents Act (AIA). Most of theprior  lawsuits were dismissed early on or resolved after enactment of the AIA since the “competitive injury” requirement was made retroactive and that retroactive aspect was upheld by the courts.  However, Sukumar v. Nautilus, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015) is one of the hold outs based on its unique set of circumstances.

Sukumar planned to open up a rehabilitation center and had purchased over 100 Nautilus machines that were custom modified to his specifications for use in his rehabilitation center.  He was not satisfied with the modified Nautilus machines.  Hence, he planned on making his own machines per his own specifications.  However, according to Sukumar, he suffered a competitive injury because Nautilus marked its machine with numerous patent numbers that didn’t cover its own machine.  The dispute center around whether Sukumar suffered a competitive injury from the wrong patent number being marked on the Nautulus machines.

Nautilus wants the bar set very high for determining whether there has been a competitive injury, whereas, Sukumar wants the bar set very low.. According to Nautilus, only those who are actively selling a competing device should be capable of suffering a competitive injury and thus be able to sue for false patent marking.  This standard would exclude Sukumar.  Sukumar wants anyone with merely an intent to enter the same market to qualify as one capable of suffering a competitive injury.  That would allow just about anyone to sue for false patent marking.

The court struck a balance in the middle since allowing anyone with just an intent to enter the market to be able to sue for false patent marking would go against the intent of the competitive injury requirement in limiting the number of people that could sue for false patent marking.  Conversely, allowing only existing competitors to sue might prevent someone with a bona fide intent to compete from entering the market which the court described as the most egregious type of injury arising from false patent marking.

The balance the court struck required the entity suing for false patent marking to have actually attempted entry into the market.  An attempted entry requires (1) an intent to enter the market with a reasonable possibility of success and (2) an action to enter the market. The court also included some other requirements in order to show that one has suffered an injury tied to the false patent marking.  The false patent marking must have impaired one’s ability to enter the market.  Plus, the one suing for false patent marking must have the ability to compete.

Does this mean that a person needs to have money, technical skills, business skills, etc.?  A patent owner could argue that no injury occurred because the plaintiff just didn’t have the wherewithal to compete.  Where does this end?  Only future litigation will tell.  However, false patent marking claims are no longer lucrative and have generally dried out.  Nevertheless, false patent marking claims can lead to large payouts since the damages calculation is still set at a maximum of $500 per unit falsely marked.

For Sukumar, his real original intent was to start a rehab center with machines, not to sell machines.  His plans may have changed during the course of his efforts to start the rehab center.  However, the court questioned his intent to compete with Nautilus.  They listed two reasons but the primary reason appears to be that Sukumar did not start to compete with Nautilus even after finding out that the Nautilus was falsely marked.  In other words, before you knew that the product was falsely marked, you did not compete.  However, once you find that the machine is not patent protection, you have no reason to not compete.  In this case, Sukumar did not start to compete.  The court assumed that he did not compete because he did not have the intent to compete.  Hence, he didn’t build his competing machines.

This type of logic further narrows the number of entities that can sue for false patent marking to those with the financial wherewithal to both fund litigation and start a business at the same time.  For the small time solo inventors and garage shop guys, false patent marking claims are not available to them for the most part since they need to not just fund the business startup, but fund the litigation.

Related Articles for Patent Infringement

  • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
  • Avoiding Patent Infringement
  • Can I copy my competitor’s product?
  • Can I copy my competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
  • Attacking patent claims as indefinite made easier
  • Reducing Scope of Doctrine of Equivalents Via Ensnarement Defense
  • Broken chain of priority invalidates patent
  • Combine Claim Elements to Avoid Infringement
  • How to invalidate a patent based on a restriction requirement
  • Active inducement of infringement in physician patient relationships
  • Irreparable harm easier to prove for grant of patent based injunction
  • Everyone in the supply chain could be sued for patent infringement
  • Penalty for False Patent Marking
  • CAFC defines competitive injury for false patent marking
  • Process patent blocks importation of product
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Author

James Yang is a patent attorney. For more than 16 years, James Yang has been representing clients to secure patent protection for their inventions and register trademarks to protect their brands. If you need help, call him at (949) 433-0900. Read More…

Popular Posts

  • Patent process overview
  • Patent process explained
  • How much does a patent cost?
  • Why patent your invention in a bad economy?

Patent Book

Navigating the Patent System - new book by Orange County patent attorney, James Yang

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the patent process and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

RECEIVE PATENT ARTICLES

Stay up to date on major changes and get tips on the patent process.

We respect your privacy.

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Prosecution Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete Terms of Use
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney