The Federal Circuit's ruling in Pequignot v. Solo Cup Co. is a
major defeat for those bringing false patent marking suits, experts agree. The ruling makes it significantly more costly, time-consuming and difficult for relators to win these actions. But whether it will staunch the recent flood of false marking suits is open to debate. “It will slow it down a lot,” says Edmund Walsh, a shareholder at Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks.

But other experts disagree, noting that there's still a powerful incentive for individuals to file these lawsuits. Relators still have “some hope they could get a high-dollar-per-article damage recovery in a case which, compared with a patent infringement suit, is not much work,” says Thad Kodish, a principal at
Fish & Richardson.

The Federal Circuit's ruling in Pequignot v. Solo Cup Co. is a
major defeat for those bringing false patent marking suits, experts agree. The ruling makes it significantly more costly, time-consuming and difficult for relators to win these actions. But whether it will staunch the recent flood of false marking suits is open to debate. “It will slow it down a lot,” says Edmund Walsh, a shareholder at Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks.

But other experts disagree, noting that there's still a powerful incentive for individuals to file these lawsuits. Relators still have “some hope they could get a high-dollar-per-article damage recovery in a case which, compared with a patent infringement suit, is not much work,” says Thad Kodish, a principal at
Fish & Richardson.