The time limit, that is, ‘limitation’ for filing any infringement suit is a crucial procedural aspect of patent law; it stipulates the time period within which a patent owner must approach the court for compensatory, injunctive or other reliefs against unauthorized use of the patented invention.
A patent grants the patentee an exclusive right to make, use, sell, offer for sale, import or otherwise commercially exploit the patented invention for a fixed statutory period, usually twenty years from the filing date.
If, during the subsistence of that period of twenty years, another person makes, uses, sells, offers for sale, imports or otherwise commercially exploits or attempts to exploit the patented invention without the permission of the patentee, such conduct or activity amounts to infringement of the exclusive rights vested in the patentee.
The patentee may then institute a civil proceeding seeking consequential remedies, such as, injunctions, punitive reliefs, compensatory damages, rendition of accounts, or seizure of infringing goods. However, the lawsuit seeking judicial intervention has to be filed within the prescribed, statutory period.
The jurisprudential rationale for limitation is the Latin maxim, ‘vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt’― the law assists the vigilant, not those who sleep over rights. If a person fails to assert rights within the prescribed time, the law will not allow them to do so later.
The time limit for filing a suit to seek compensation for a tortious wrong, or to enforce a civil or proprietary right depends on the judicial forum and the applicable territorial laws.
In most jurisdictions, the action must be brought within three to six years from the date on which the cause of action arises, that is, the date of occurrence or discovery of infringement. For instance, the limitation period is at present three years in India and Germany; in France, it is five years; and, in UK & USA, it is six years.
Since patent infringement is considered a continuing civil wrong, each act of infringement may give rise to a fresh cause of action. In other words, if a party continues to infringe actively, the limitation window is calculated from the last act of infringement, acting as a rolling deadline.
Older claims may become time-barred unless the infringement is shown to be continuous and recurring. While unreasonable delays may not extinguish the right to sue entirely in some jurisdictions, it may restrict the damages recoverable for earlier acts. In other countries, inordinate delays may affect equitable reliefs, particularly if the defendant has altered its position or the patentee knowingly acquiesced to the infringing conduct.
In most jurisdictions, if patent-holders delay legal action despite having prior knowledge of infringement, then they risk the loss of claims. While the main lawsuit can be filed within the period of limitation, requests for preliminary injunctions must be made quickly—for instance, in Germany such injunctive relief must be sought within one month of gaining knowledge of the infringement.
It is crucial to identify if the infringement is a continuing violation, which allows a lawsuit to be sustainable even if the first instance of infringement occurred much earlier. Each infringing act creates a fresh cause of action. However, patentees must remember that patent validity must be vitally ensured; if, say, renewal fee has not been paid, then a suit for infringement during the lapsed period would not be maintainable.
Limitation is aimed at ensuring timely enforcement of rights; preventing stale and time-barred claims; and, promoting certainty in commercial transactions. It is pivotal to note that prompt legal action strengthens the patentee’s case. Missing this window can irreparably jeopardize the patent holder’s judicial remedies.
At BLAZE VENTURES, we have elaborate processes and qualified professionals to help inventors and enterprises effectively create, protect and monetise IP rights over their ideas, inventions and innovations.
