What are the most effective strategies for enforcing your patent rights against infringers?

Es fundamental identificar la fortaleza de la patente y los antecedentes de la relación de infracción para establecer de manera previa (i) si las reivindicaciones cubren la supuesta infracción; (ii) si las anualidades han sido pagadas oportunamente; (iii) si en el trámite de la patente no se renunció a una reivindicación clave; (iv) qué tanto resistiría un ataque en contra que persiga su invalidez.

Make sure the main thing that makes your invention your invention patentable is clearly spelled out in claim 1 on your application. If it is not, someone may take the claim and make it their number 1 claim and get another patent. Spend time on this step. Find a good patent attorney and file your patent right.

I would be careful about the wording in that "cease and desist" letter. It could be construed as an "imminent threat of litigation," and if the infringer is much larger (bigger war chest) and in another state, it could file a declaratory judgment action dragging you into court against your will and threatening your patent rights. I'd be more inclined to send a "notice letter" informing of my client's rights and inviting a conference, as a first step. Only if this fails would I take a cease and desist approach but without any threat of litigation, unless I am prepared for it and ready to file in a forum of my choice, under venue rules.

Le contenu de la lettre de mise en garde est important mais aussi son destinataire. En France, il est préférable d'envoyer ce type de courrier au concurrent présumé contrefacteur. En effet, l'envoi d'un tel courrier au client du concurrent, sans décision de justice, peut constituer un acte de concurrence déloyale.

Yes, this is usually the result one hopes to achieve after the "notice letter" that I propose, instead of the "cease and desist" letter.

I agree. This is the most expensive route and a last resort, unless the defendant is both weak financially and stubbornly unwilling to see that it infringing patent rights. If at all possible, gain as much information as possible, and sworn testimony, so that the complaint could be filed along with a Motion for an injunction. If an injunction is granted, which is not often, but possible in cases of clear literal infringement, then a settlement is possible because it could mean that only $$ remain to be negotiated.

In cases of literal infringement, i.e. literal correspondence between patent claim language and the accused infringing device/method, it might not be completely necessary to wait for expensive Markman Hearings, and discovery. An early motion for Summary Judgment could be attempted to at least determine the liability aspect of the case. Even if it is not successful, the briefs do educate the judge on the facts of the technology and the activities of the defendant and that can be useful in the Markman Hearing phase and in discovery. It might "tip off" the defendant as to your theory of the liability case but it could short circuit the lengthy path to trial and it might stimulate settlement talks. In fact early mediation is not a bad idea.

Il est préférable de prendre contact avec un mandataire en brevet "local", avant l'envoi d'un courrier de mise en garde sur un territoire. En effet, il existe souvent des règles à respecter en fonction des législations.