Close Menu
X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
The recent passage of patent reform bills by the House and Senate has raised expectations for enactment a new law this year, but there’s lingering controversy about whether the patent office can keep all its fees and about provisions allowing for new patent challenges. On June 23, the U.S. House of Representatives passed The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, H.R. 1249, by a 304-117 vote. The vote follows the U.S. Senate’s March 95-5 vote for S.23, but differences between them mean the bills must be reconciled before becoming law. Both bills would change the U.S. patent system from a first-to-invent system into a first-to-file system. But the House bill, unlike the Senate’s, doesn’t ban fee diversion, the oft-criticized practice of diverting U.S. Patent and Trademark Office revenue that exceeds the agency’s budget to other government programs. The House bill calls for fees to be deposited into an account called the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Public Enterprise Fund, but industry insiders say its unclear how the PTO could access those funds. The American Intellectual Property Law Association ended up supporting both the House and Senate bills, while expressing strong reservations about the House fee funding compromise, said AIPLA executive director Q. Todd Dickinson. “The problem is how does the PTO access those funds reasonably and in a timely manner?,” Dickinson said. “I don’t think anyone in stakeholder community is happy about it,” he said. “While we appreciate the comments on the House floor by the appropriations leadership and the house leadership about the intention to keep all the funds in the office, we’d like to see more it be more definitive in terms of the access.” PTO director David Kappos’ statement following House passage also expressed concerns about the funding issue. Kappos said that the agency is “encouraged by the statements of so many members of Congress calling for the USPTO to have full access to all of its fee collections….Full funding of the USPTO is necessary for the USPTO to successfully implement this legislation and to more effectively perform its core mission.” Both bills seeks to rein in what are known as false patent marking suits — whistleblower suits that accuse companies of falsely labeling their products as covered by patents. Both propose to allow only the U.S. government to file suits to recover the statutory penalty. Competitors injured by another party’s false marking could sue for damages equal to the competitive injury. Provisions designed to rein in patent infringement damages from litigation were stripped from both final bills. The bills also include controversial, although not identical, provisions to challenge patents. Each of the bills includes new post-grant review processes allowing challenges to issued patents for a set period of time. They would also change the inter partes re-examination process, which can be triggered by anyone who is not the patent owner, including an alleged infringer. Both bills allow for inter partes review either after the PTO grants a patent or after the post-grant review. Steven Moore, an intellectual property litigation partner in the Stamford, Conn., office of Kelley Drye & Warren, said that any final bill that’s close to the versions passed by the Senate and House would probably make patents worth a lot less. Moore said each of the bills would create too many avenues for third parties to disrupt and delay a filer’s patenting process. “If I really don’t want your patent around, I will put you into a post-grant challenge or an opposition,” Moore said. “If you can get out of your opposition, I’m going to throw an inter partes re-examination against you.” The end result is more opportunities to game the system, Moore said. “I don’t see how an independent inventor could afford this process,” Moore said. “This bill that passed the House is basically a mess,” said Dale Carlson, who chairs the patent prosecution practice group at Wiggin and Dana in New Haven, Conn. “It creates a confusingly large number of administrative procedures [to challenge patents] that are going to co-exist for a period of time and that are going to confuse the users of the system and patent lawyers,” said Carlson, who recently wrote an opinion piece critical of the legislation. Carlson also said adding more procedures will put pressure on the PTO, which is already grappling with a large application backlog. The PTO had a backlog of 703,175 applications as of the end of May 2011, according to PTO statistics. “[Now] we have a much more complex set of laws coming into effect,” Carlson said. “It’s going to make it more difficult for the patent office to operate.” Dickinson said the AIPLA supports the additional patent review procedures in the bills. “The thing that saves them from being overly burdensome is that they’re time limited,” Dickinson said. “[But] getting and keeping the funds is critical to ensure the office can maintain that schedule.” Other intellectual property groups also had a more favorable initial reaction to the bill. The Intellectual Property Owners Association “believes the legislation contains several very important provisions for improving the patent system,” said IPO’s executive director, Herbert Wamsley. “These include the sections on first-inventor-to-file, post-grant and inter partes review proceedings, and curbing frivolous false patent marking suits.” The Biotechnology Industry Organization issued a statement indicating that it would work with House and Senate leaders to get a final bill passed and enacted this year. “Small biotechnology companies rely heavily on their patents to attract investment to fund the lengthy and expensive research and development process necessary to bring breakthrough medical therapies and other products to patients and consumers,” stated BIO’s president and chief executive officer, Jim Greenwood. “Strong intellectual property protection is critical for these companies.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

More From ALM

Premium Subscription

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now

Team Accounts

Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now

Bundle Subscriptions

Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now

Legalweek(year) 2021

February 02, 2021 - July 14, 2021
Virtual

Legalweek(year) will bring together thousands of legal professionals for a series of 5 innovative virtual legal events.


Register

General Counsel Conference Midwest: SuperConference 2021

July 26, 2021 - July 27, 2021
Chicago, IL

GCC Midwest addresses today's legal issues facing companies by providing general counsel with insight and best practices.


Register

General Counsel Summit (GCS) 2021

September 07, 2021 - September 08, 2021
Sydney

General Counsel Summit is the premier event for in-house counsel, hosting esteemed legal minds from all sectors of the economy.


Register

ATTORNEY-GEORGIA

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Jarrard & Davis, LLP, a growing local government law firm with a statewide practice, located in north metro, seeks talented attorneys to pra...


Apply Now ›

Local Government Attorney

Lawrenceville, Georgia, United States

The Gwinnett County Law Department is seeking an attorney with 9+ years of experience practicing employment law in a government setting. Me...


Apply Now ›

Job Opportunity Legal Assistant/paralegal/full-Time

Marietta, Georgia, United States

Turner Ross Germain, LLC, is seeking a legal assistant/paralegal, with at least 3 years' experience, for long-term, full-time employment, f...


Apply Now ›

COMPASS LEGAL MARKETING

04/12/2021
DBR Web

RIVERO MESTRE IS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE OUR LATEST RECOGNITIONS, RIVERO MESTRE NAMED FIRM OF THE YEAR IN THE 2021 BENCHMARK FLORIDA LITIGATION GUIDE. CHAMBERS NAMES RIVERO MESTRE OUTSTANDING FIRM FOR FURTHERING DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION. ANDRES RIVERO, JORGE A.


View Announcement ›

LOMBARDI & LOMBARDI

04/12/2021
NJLJ Web

LOMBARDI & LOMBARDI, P.A. PROUDLY WELCOMES JAMIE D. HAPPAS P.J. Cv. (Ret.)


View Announcement ›

BRACH EICHLER LLC

04/05/2021
NJLJ Web

Please to announce...


View Announcement ›

Subscribe to Corporate Counsel

Don't miss the crucial news and insights you need to make informed legal decisions. Join Corporate Counsel now!

Unlimited access to Corporate Counsel
Access to additional free ALM publications
1 free article* across the ALM subscription network every 30 days
Exclusive discounts on ALM events and publications
Join Corporate Counsel

Already have an account? Sign In