Patent troll roll call: The carefree litigator


settlementIn our last post, we introduced you to the first type of patent troll, or patent assertion entity (PAE) — the threatening letter-writer. This is a troll that targets great swaths of unsuspecting businesses with a series of threatening letters, often prompting lucrative licensing fees without ever stepping into court.

The second breed of PAEs is similar, but slightly more sophisticated. This breed files actual patent litigation suits because they know that patent litigation is expensive. It is not unheard of for a party to spend well over $1 million before even getting to trial in a patent case. PAEs know that almost all of this cost will be borne, however, by the accused infringer, not by the PAE.

The PAE has no business, so its operations are not interrupted by discovery requests, depositions, or trial proceedings. The PAE has no sales to lose and usually no employees to be bothered. It will typically just need to produce a publically available file and some licensing agreements.

In contrast, the accused infringer will likely have documents, employees, and vast amounts of electronic documents relevant to the case that will need to be searched for, collected, reviewed, and produced to the PAE.

Further, while the accused infringer has to hire specialized patent litigators to handle the litigation and pay their legal fees on an ongoing business, the PAE is likely represented on a contingency basis — it will only have to pay its lawyers if it wins the case. All this means that over the course of the litigation, the accused infringer’s bills go up and up while the PAE has no bills.

Even if the accused infringer tries to fight the PAE, there is no quick way to end the litigation and achieve victory.

The key to patent litigation is determining what the patent covers: If it covers the accused technology, there’s infringement; if not, no infringement. The court is required to decide what the claim terms mean and thus, what is covered by the claims of the patent. But often the court does not determine what the claim terms mean until well into the litigation. Without knowing what the claim terms mean, the court has no way of determining if the PAE’s claims of infringement have merit or not. And so a PAE can make an accusation of infringement, relying on vague, unclear patent language, and the accused infringer can do nothing about it until after almost a year of litigation. All the while, the PAE keeps its case alive and keeps the legal fee meter running for the accused infringer.

The result is a situation where the accused infringer faces so much of a burden of fighting the PAE that it becomes appealing to pay some lesser amount to make the litigation go away.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Thompson Coburn LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Thompson Coburn LLP on:

Popular Topics
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.