Why ignoring the letter is the riskiest option
A demand letter puts you on notice of the patent, and knowledge of the patent is a key element of willful infringement. In U.S. patent cases, willfulness can support enhanced damages of up to three times the damages awarded, and attorney fees can be awarded in exceptional cases. A timely, competent written opinion gives you a sound basis for your decisions and a record of good faith. It does not guarantee an outcome, but it puts you in a far stronger position than guessing.
For companies, founders, and in-house teams
This page is for you if a patent owner, a competitor, or a licensing company has written to you alleging that a product you make, sell, import, or use infringes their patent, whether the letter asks you to stop selling, take a license, pay for past sales, or simply respond by a date. You don't need to have been sued yet. Opinion work is most useful before you reply, redesign, or sign anything.
What to do in the first few days
Do this first
- Preserve everything. Keep the letter, envelope or email headers, and attachments. Note the date you received it and any deadline it sets.
- Keep internal discussion to a small group. Ask the people who need to know not to speculate about infringement in email or chat; those messages can be discoverable later.
- Gather the record. Identify the exact product version accused, when it was first sold, and the technical documents that show how it works.
- Get advice before you reply. Have the asserted patent, its file history, and your product reviewed first.
Don't do this yet
- Don't write back admitting or flatly denying infringement before the claims have been analyzed.
- Don't contact the patent owner, inventor, or licensor informally to clear it up.
- Don't redesign or relaunch the product as a quick fix without checking whether the change actually avoids the claims.
- Don't let the response date pass in silence. If you need more time, ask for it properly, through counsel.
What a patent opinion covers
A useful opinion isn't a one-page reassurance. It's a written, claim-by-claim analysis you and your counsel can rely on and, if you choose, share with the other side.
Non-infringement
Each asserted claim, element by element, against how your product actually works, identifying missing elements and genuine claim-construction disputes.
Invalidity
Prior art and the patent's file history at the USPTO: whether the claims should have been allowed as written, and what the patent owner gave up to get them.
Risk and options
A practical view of exposure and next steps: reply strategy, licensing posture, design-around feasibility, and whether a validity challenge is worth considering.
You'll come away knowing which claims are a real problem and which aren't, where the patent is vulnerable, what a defensible reply looks like, and what each path (respond, negotiate, design around, or challenge validity) will require.
How it works
01
Confidential intake
You share the demand letter and the asserted patent. We run a conflicts check, agree on a confidential channel for documents, and flag the response deadline.
02
Claim and product mapping
The asserted claims are mapped, element by element, against your product as it's actually made and sold, not against marketing descriptions.
03
Prior art and file-history review
We search and analyze prior art and review the prosecution history for invalidity positions and for statements that narrow what the claims can cover.
04
Written opinion and next steps
You receive a written opinion setting out the non-infringement and invalidity analysis, the risks, and the response options to consider with your counsel.
Complex file history? That's often where the answer is.
Asserted patents often come from families with continuations, ex parte reexaminations, or earlier IPR challenges. Reading that record well can narrow the claims or reveal invalidity positions others miss. Hands-on experience in those proceedings is uncommon, even among patent attorneys, and it is central to how we approach demand-letter opinions.
Common questions
We haven't been sued. Do we still need an opinion?
That's usually the best time to get one. An opinion before suit lets you reply from analysis rather than alarm, while you still control the timing.
Will getting an opinion waive privilege, or does it have to be shared?
How an opinion is used is a decision to make with your counsel. Many companies obtain an opinion for advice, then decide whether and how to disclose it, for example to rebut a willfulness allegation. Raise it at intake, before the work begins.
What do you need from us to start?
The demand letter, the patent number(s) asserted, and a way to understand the accused product: technical documents, specifications, or a product walkthrough. You don't need to prepare a legal brief.
What if we think the patent is obviously invalid?
That instinct is tested, not assumed. The invalidity analysis documents the prior art and file-history support claim by claim, so the position can be put to the patent owner credibly.
How much does it cost, and how long does it take?
Both depend on how many claims are asserted, how complex the product is, and the deadline in your letter. Engagements are billed on an hourly basis, and scope and timing are confirmed after the confidential intake, before substantive work begins.
We already have lawyers. Where do you fit?
Alongside them. We provide the patent analysis, including prior art, claim mapping, and the opinion itself, that litigation and in-house counsel rely on. If you don't have patent counsel yet, say so at intake.
On a deadline? Start with the review.
Bring the letter as it is, even if you've already replied once or a lawsuit has been threatened. An opinion is most valuable early, but it's rarely too late to build a proper record.
Please don't send confidential technical files through the web form until a conflicts check is complete and a confidential channel is confirmed.
General information only. This page describes patent opinion work in general terms. It is not legal advice, does not create an attorney-client relationship, and is not a prediction of any outcome.