A link to the bill is here, and I understand committee mark up was yesterday. The text is:
‘‘No court of the United States (and no district court of the Virgin Islands, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands) shall issue an order that purports to restrain the enforcement against a non-party of any statute, regulation, order, or similar authority, unless the non-party is represented by a party acting in a representative capacity pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.’’
I am trying to envision the problems this creates for patents, and happen to be writing a book on Remedies right now.
A fellow professor who supports the bill noted that my original headline had it backwards. Let me see if I can put it in context and understand it:
A court, if this is enacted, cannot restrain enforcement of a statute against a non-party. So, a court could not issue an injunction that did not allow a patent owner to enjoin non-parties, because a statute allows injunctions. (I think I have the double negative right.) So, I *think* it helps patent injunctions? What about in contributory or inducement cases?