This study aims to examine the legal dimensions and practical implications of individual defenses in patent infringement litigation. The research adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology with a comparative approach, and the data are collected through documentary and library-based research, including an analysis of national legislation, international instruments, judicial decisions, and legal doctrine. The study first analyzes the concept, theoretical foundations, and position of individual defenses within different legal systems and then identifies and examines their manifestations with a particular focus on Iranian law. Subsequently, through a comparative analysis of the laws of the United States, the European Union, and relevant international instruments, the similarities and differences between individual defenses and other defensive mechanisms are clarified. The findings indicate that individual defenses, while preserving the balance between the interests of inventors and the public, can function as moderating tools that limit the exclusivity effects of patent rights and prevent broader conflicts in the exploitation of innovations. The analysis of Iranian law further reveals that although certain instances of individual defenses have been recognized sporadically in legislation and judicial practice, a coherent and comprehensive framework has not yet been established. Accordingly, it is necessary for the legislator to adopt clear and well-defined rules, drawing on comparative legal experiences and international standards, in order to ensure a balanced protection of both inventors’ rights and the legitimate interests of users.