penalties. 13 C.F.R. § 121.108(e). Moreover, all claims of a patent issued following an intentional misrepresentation of small entity status may be held to be unenforceable as the result of inequitable conduct, i.e., fraud upon the United States Patent and Trademark Office. See MPEP § 2016; 37 C.F.R. § 1.27(h). As long as any small-entity assertions are made without any intent to deceive, any improper assertion of small-entity status should not be considered fraud. See DH Technology, Inc. v. Synergystex Intern., Inc., 154 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 1998); Turbocare Corp. v. General Electric Company, 45 F. Supp. 2d 110 (D. Mass. Mar. 31, 1999). References External links Case law Ulead Systems Inc. v. Lex Computer & Management, 351 F.3d 1139 (2003) Statutes 35 U.S.C. 41(h)(1). Patent office procedures Manual of Patent Examination Procedure, section 509.02 Commentary "How can an Investment Invalidate a Patent?" by James Goepel, Greenberg Traurig LLP Canadian patent law United States patent law