Challenging invalid patents instead of paying for expensive licenses has proved to be the most cost-effective and successful way to stop unreasonable assertions.  Unlike other third-party solutions, we don't monetize transactions by paying.  In fact, we never pay. Ever. 

Unified has filed more patent challenges than all other third-party petitioners combined.  Unified was the #6 most prolific all time PTAB petitioner and #5 for 2018.  Moreover, we have successfully neutralized more patents than any other third-party.


In 2018, Unified filed 35 IPRs challenging NPE patents and achieved a successful outcome in 83% of our cases. (Last updated February 19, 2019)

“Success” is defined as a positive institution decision, invalidation, or no money settlement by Unified. The outcome of each case was determined as of the latest available status such that no case is counted more than once. Visit Unified’s Portal for more information.


Unified has developed a reputation for challenging anyone and the only third-party to have challenged the largest and most notorious NPEs, including General Patent Corporation, Intellectual Ventures, IP Edge, Uniloc, Marathon, Acacia, and others. In contrast, other third-parties have developed a close and symbiotic working relationship with the NPEs they purportedly seek to deter, resulting in more frivolous litigation.

TPF comparison.png

For transparency we have included a link to all PTAB cases brought by each entity listed above:  

RPX | Unified CFAD Askeladden


  • Challenge Early - To disrupt monetization campaigns before valuable resources are wasted

  • Challenge Anyone - Regardless of an entity’s size and unconflicted by commercial relationships

  • Refuse to Pay - To ensure that we never encourage future assertions

  • Refuse to Incentivize - Unlike some third-parties, our settlements never include provisions which encourage going after others

  • Act Independently - As the sole real-party and never as a proxy

  • Educate Licensors - To ensure they know that low quality patents will be challenged

Buying licenses to invalid patents should be, at best, an absolute last resort. While paying may be expedient in the short term, it rewards the assertion of low quality patents and, thus, encourages more predatory activity in the future. Further, it is impossible to purchase all of the low quality patents.  The unfortunate fact is that with millions of granted U.S. patents, there is an abundant supply of low quality assets available for assertion.  

Unified exists to break the cycle of patent assertion.  We never have, and never will, pay because we aim to stop, not promote, frivolous patent litigation.

When Unified settles, we do so only in exchange for royalty-free licenses. This is an unqualified success and it deters future litigation.  The same isn’t true when our competitors pay for licenses or purchase patents.  These payments perpetuate the cycle of litigation and, moreover, create an inherent conflict of interest because entities that participate in the patent marketplace may be tempted to fan the flames they are paid to extinguish.  Unified faces no such conflict because we have no financial relationships with asserters.