10/08/2026
You have a patent. Now what can you actually do with it?
Every newly issued U.S. patent tells its owner that the patent provides the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing the patented invention.
But what does that “right to exclude” actually mean in practice?
That question was at the center of a recent Federal Circuit case involving several inventor advocacy organizations. The groups argued that the language appearing on issued patents can be misleading in light of the Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in eBay v. MercExchange.
Before eBay, the Federal Circuit generally favored permanent injunctions once patent infringement and validity had been established, absent exceptional circumstances. The Supreme Court rejected that approach and held that courts must instead apply the traditional four-factor equitable test when deciding whether to grant a permanent injunction.
In other words, an injunction does not automatically follow a finding of patent infringement.
The advocacy groups challenged the USPTO’s continued use of the “right to exclude” language. The Federal Circuit did not decide whether that language is misleading or should change. Instead, it affirmed the District Court’s dismissal because the organizations lacked standing to bring the challenge.
It’s a nuanced distinction, but an important one.
A patent provides valuable legal rights, but the existence of those rights does not automatically determine the remedy available when infringement occurs.
For inventors and businesses, obtaining a patent is an important milestone. Understanding what those rights mean in practice, and what enforcement may actually involve, is just as important.