Patent Marking Requirements Post TransCore

Law360 (October 16, 2009, 1:37 PM EDT) -- The patent marking limitation of 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) is becoming increasingly important. With more lawsuits being brought by patentees who do not make a product, but instead just license patents, there are many opportunities to raise this defense and, conversely, many instances where patentees need to be mindful of this important requirement. In light of a recent Federal Circuit case, the patent marking requirement may become more significant.

This article explains the patent marking requirement and examines the impact of TransCore LP v. Electronic Transaction Consultants Corp., 563 F.3d 1271 (Fed. Cir. 2009) on the obligations to mark under agreements...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!