[AlbertCory]

You don't present it "to court" because that might be decided by a jury of unsophisticated people. You file an Inter Partes Review, which goes to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, and is cheaper (note I didn't say "cheap").

The U.S. doesn't have a "loser pays" model like other countries. You can file for attorney's fees, but the barriers are higher.

[freejazz]

It's called an invalidity counterclaim.

[AlbertCory]

??? what are you disputing here? IPRs, or defending against an infringement suit, or what?

[burnished]

Doesn't look like a dispute? I think they were trying to supply you with a phrase that slipped your mind.

[AlbertCory]

the question is the antecedent basis of "it"

[freejazz]

You don't need to get an IPR, you just make an invalidity counterclaim. IPRs may or may not be desirable for a number of reasons.

[AlbertCory]

TIL. We're talking about US law, right?

I've never heard the term "invalidity counterclaim" and I was in Google Patent Litigation where suits come in constantly. IPRs were pretty standard. Maybe the lawyers did use it and I just never heard it.

If something was going to trial, then "invalidity" was one of the possible defenses, as was "non-infringement."

Who are you making this claim TO? The court? The PTO?