直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Article

Virtual Marking: A Flexible Option for Pharmaceuticals

July 1, 2020

Life Science Leader

By Laura P. Masurovsky; Mark J. Feldstein, Ph.D.; Olivia C. Martzahn

Physically marking a product, or in some cases its associated packaging, with the “patent” or “pat.” and the numbers of any patents covering the product provides constructive notice to the public that the product is covered by the identified patents. Marking can be important for obtaining damages for infringing products sold prior to the date when you sue an infringer. A 2011 change in the law provides a new option for marking: “virtual marking.”

While physically marking remains an option, virtual marking allows a patent owner to mark the product with “patent” or “pat.” along with an internet address. The corresponding webpage, in turn, identifies the patents covering the product. Like traditional physical marking, virtual marking can provide constructive notice that a product is patent protected. Also like traditional physical marking, virtual marking can preserve your right to recover pre-suit damages for patent infringement.

Read the full article here.

 

Tags

virtual marking

Related Industries

Life Sciences

Pharmaceutical

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Laura P. Masurovsky
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4043
Email
Mark J. Feldstein, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4092
Email

Originally printed in Life Science Leader on July 1, 2020. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm’s clients.

Related Insights

Conference

Life Sciences Patent Network North America Fall 2026

November 2-3, 2026

San Francisco

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

At the PTAB Blog

Squires Issues Precedential Decision Clarifying Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Rejections

August 17, 2026

Conference

13th Annual Summit for Women Leaders in Life Sciences Law

July 29-30, 2026

Boston

Conference

2026 China Pharmaceutical Innovation Conference

July 22-24, 2026

Shanghai

Federal Circuit IP Blog

“2” Does Not Provide Written Description Support for “1”: Federal Circuit Affirms District Court’s Invalidation of Patent

July 8, 2026

Articles

Genus Claiming (Including Means Plus Function “MPF” Claiming) in Biotech and Pharma: Doctrinal Trajectory and Drafting Strategies

June 2026

Articles

How Low Can You Go? Courts Lower Marking Defense Burden, Raising Patent Damages Risks

June 29, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Affirms Noninfringement Ruling in Hatch-Waxman Litigation Based on Claim Construction, Prosecution History Estoppel, and the Disclosure-Dedication Rule

June 26, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP