Propat International Corp. v. RPost, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that party has standing to sue if it “has a legally protected interest in the patent created by the Patent Act,” and that bare licensee has no standing
• holding that a suit for patent 4 infringement must “be brought by a party holding a legal title to the patent”
• noting that retention of right to veto, be consulted about, or give consent to litigation decisions weighs in favor of finding agreement a license, not an assignment
• noting that retention of right to veto, be consulted about, or give consent to litigation decisions weighs in favor of finding agreement a license, not an assignment
• holding that where the patent owner provided the plaintiff with “an exclusive license and the right to sue infringers,” the plaintiff nonetheless could not sue for infringement where the patentee retained “the right to consent to settlements of litigation”
• noting that a licensor’s power to 11 terminate an agreement is an indication that the licensor retains a significant 12 ownership interest in the patent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).