Anup Misra Discusses Forced Litigation Funding Disclosure Threatening Patent Rights

In a recent guest article via Law360, Managing Director – IP Anup Misra shares how forced litigation funding disclosure unfairly impacts patentholders’ rights, citing that heightened transparency undermines plaintiffs’ access to capital and limits small enterprises’ ability to assert valid patent rights.

Misra argues that calls for heightened transparency in third-party litigation funding (TPLF) agreements often rely on speculative concerns rather than substantiated data. Critics of TPLF suggest that funders drive litigation strategies or promote frivolous lawsuits, yet such claims overlook the rigorous due diligence and non-recourse nature of funding agreements. By evaluating cases independently and recovering only upon successful outcomes, funders ensure that only strong, meritorious patent claims receive support.

Furthermore, imposing mandatory disclosure disproportionately burdens plaintiffs while shielding corporate defendants from similar scrutiny. Misra highlights that the current proposals serve as strategic tools for defendants, diverting focus away from the merits of a case. Disclosure requirements can also discourage funding, creating a chilling effect on innovation and hindering the ability of small inventors, startups, and universities to enforce their intellectual property rights against well-funded corporate infringers. Misra stresses that courts already have adequate measures to address legitimate transparency concerns without resorting to broad, prejudicial mandates.