Patent Reform 2015

Representative Goodlatte has re-introduced the Innovation Act that easily passed the House in the last congressional term.  Senate leaders have offered bipartisan support for a reform bill as has President Obama. The push for reform is primarily focusing on bad actors asserting bad patents.  Primary elements of the bill would create a presumption of awarding attorney fees to the prevailing party and ensuring that those financing litigation can be held liable if the assertion entity is undercapitalized; requiring higher pleading standards for patent cases; and limiting discovery until after claim construction. Of course, the actual impact will very much depend upon the details of what passes.

Goodlatte is the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee.  Rep. Issa is also in supporting the legislation in his role as chair of the IP Subcommittee.

 

15 thoughts on “Patent Reform 2015

  1. 2

    Any presumption of an award of attorneys fees to a prevailing defendant is a net so broad as to sweep in not only the targeted conduct, but anyone who simply cannot afford to lose. The result would be as it is in England and elsewhere in Europe where litigation, like polo, is the sport of Kings.

    1. 2.1

      I absolutely agree. Moreover, I don’t think it is a good idea to experiment with patent litigation as if it is a throw away. This is a different model of litigation that may or may not be right for our country. But, all of our laws are not based on loser pays. We can expect massive problems. We can expect there to be little common law to deal with issues that will arise and we can expect statutes not to have been written with loser pays in mind.

      Now please, people, no attorney that has ever done any litigation could possible argue with this.

  2. 1

    Oh boy more weakening of patents by those that don’t understand them and won’t listen to those that do. Google’s money hard at work.

    1. 1.1

      Besides from everything I’ve heard patent litigation is way down…way, way, down. The AIA has crippled it with Alice.

      1. 1.1.1

        “Besides from everything I’ve heard patent litigation is way down…way, way, down. The AIA has crippled it with Alice.”

        What’s that you say? Alice knocked most of the garbage out of the system and litigation is waaaaay down? Truly, that sounds like a win for the rule of law.

    2. 1.2

      Clearly you haven’t heard Rep. Issa repeatedly talk about how he has 36 patents and is an innovator.

    3. 1.3

      Just yesterday you were saying that BRI shouldn’t be used in IPR. This law would change that — the claims would be construed as in Court.

      I don’t think it makes your argument stronger when you don’t critically look at the bill to discuss its actual merits, and instead make ad hominem attacks, especially when just yesterday you were arguing the opposite.

      1. 1.3.1

        I didn’t see the claim construction issue, but the other provisions appear to me to be much larger issues.

        For example, “a presumption of awarding attorney fees to the prevailing party”.

        Jane says: “ad hominem attacks.” Where are those Jane?

        1. 1.3.1.1

          Here you go: “weakening of patents by those that don’t understand them and won’t listen to those that do. Google’s money hard at work.”

          1. 1.3.1.1.1

            “weakening of patents by those that don’t understand them and won’t listen to those that do. Google’s money hard at work.”

            A factual statement.

Comments are closed.