"Bare Licensee" Lacks Standing to Sue for Infringement

January 09, 2007
Post by Blog Staff

In Propat International Corp & David Find and Helene Glasser ("Propat") v. RPsot International Limted, Zafar Khan, Kenneth Barton and Terrance Tomkow ("Rpost"), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's decision that Propat lacked standing to sue for infringement and, on the cross-appeal, affirmed the district court's order denying RPost's request for an award of fees and costs. At issue was a patent ("the '219 patent") entitled "Apparatus and Method for Authenticating the Dispatch and Contents of Documents." The '219 patent was assigned to Authenticational Technologies Ltd. (Authentix") by the inventors. Authentix and Propat entered into a licensing agreement giving Propat responsibility to license the patent to third parties, to enforce the licensing agreement, and to sue infringers. The agreement contemplated that Propat would be engaged in licensing and litigation but did not explicitly address whether Propat enjoyed a license to practice the patent. Similarly, the agreement did not explicitly state whether Authentix retained the right to practice the patent. Subsequently, Propat sued Rpost for infringement of the '219 patent. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's holding that Propat was not the owner of the patent and thus did not have standing to sue. This holding was based on a review of the agreement which showed Authentix retained sufficient rights in the patent and that "all substantial rights" in the patent were not assigned to Propat. To read the full decision, click here.

Post Categories

Comments (0)
Post a Comment

Captcha Image
Return to the Filewrapper Blog

Search Posts


The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.


McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.