Follow Us Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Intellectual Property Patent Licensing and Transactions Patent Litigation

The High Bar for Challenging an Improperly Revived Patent

The recent In Re Rembrandt Technologies decision is a reminder of both the potential consequence of a patent holder’s disingenuous assertion of unintentionality and the challenges that defendants face when raising the improper filing of a petition to revive a lapsed patent as a defense.


Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

Almost two decades ago, Kevin Rivette and David Kline published Rembrandts in the Attic, which reminded patent holders that they should unleash the competitive power of their portfolios. But patents are only of value while they are in force, and to keep a patent in force for its full term, a patent holder must periodically pay maintenance fees.  If the patent holder does not pay these fees, the patent will lapse before its maximum term expires.

To continue reading,
become a free ALM digital reader

Benefits include:

*May exclude premium content

Read These Next