1,181
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
The Innovation Act was previously introduced in 2013, but the Senate did not respond with the introduction of a similar bill[[https://www.govtrack. In 2015, the House reintroduced us/congress/bills/114/hr9#| GovTrack]] predicts that the Innovation Act, and the Senate also introduced the similar PATENT Act. The full title has a 36% chance of the bill is "To amend title 35, United States Code, and the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act to make improvements and technical corrections, and for other purposesbeing enacted."
GovTrack predicts that the Innovation Act has a 36% chance of being enacted.==Provisions==
===Current Patent System [http://knobbe.com/pdf/2010-December-The-US-Patent-Litigation-Process.pdf]===
American Intellectual Property Law Association reported in 2009 that the median cost of a patent infringement suit was 650,000 if less than 1 mil was at risk; 2.5 million if 1 mil to 25 mil at risk; 5.5 million if more than 25 mil at risk.
*More than 95% of patent cases resolved before trial
“Typical patent infringement lawsuit begins with complaint filed by patent owner in a US district court. Complaint identified alleged infringers, and the US patent or patents alleged to be infringed.”
*Usually includes a brief statement of the alleged infringing act
*Doesn’t identify specific products or processes that are accused of infringement
*Average time from filing a case to judgement is 33 months, or 2 years 9 months
Some districts (northern district of CA, Eastern district of TX) have local patent rules that require plaintiffs to identify the specific claims being asserted, and specify where each limitation of each asserted claim is found in each accused product.
A sizable majority of patent troll lawsuits (some say as high as 90%) involve patents on software
the problem to patents of low quality having “unclear property rights, overly broad claims, or both.” The problem is inherent in software because, unlike a mechanical device, it is intangible and difficult to clearly define.[https://www.bestlawyers.com/Article/patent-trolls-separating-myth-reality/539/]
no edit summary
Return to [[Innovation Policy#Patent Reform| Patent Reform]]
The [https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/9| H.R.9 :Innovation Act] was introduced reintroduced on February 5, 2015, by Representative Bob Goodlatte (R-VA). The full title of the act is "To amend title 35, United States Code, and the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act to make improvements and technical corrections, and for other purposes." <ref name="GovTrack" /> The bill was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary and Subcommittee on the Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet, and was placed on the Union Calendar on July 29, 2015. Currently the bill has 27 cosponsors, 15 Republicans and 12 Democrats.
==Why it Hasn't been passed==
The House Innovation Act and Senate Patent Act are very similar; both acts address abusive litigation through “increased transparency, more limited discovery, heightened pleading standards, and ‘loser pays’ fee shifting”. However, there has been a delay in the passing of the bills because of controversy surrounding the shifting of attorney fees. Fee shifting was originally suggested as a way to incentivize small firms and businesses that were being unfairly accused of patent infringement to bring the case to court, so that they would not have to pay their attorney fees. However, there have been arguments stating that fee shifting would actually increase the settlement rate of small businesses being accused of patent infringement, because they don’t want to take the risk of losing and paying for the winner’s attorneys’ fees, in addition to their own. [http://www.bna.com/debate-patent-reform-n17179934625/ (Bloomberg BNA)]
Issues/cricism of the innovation act [http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2015/05/20/study-should-pause-patent-reform/id=57946/]:
Amends the federal judicial code to restrict the venues where patent actions may be brought to judicial districts where:
the defendant has its principal place of business or is incorporated, has committed an act of infringement and has a regular and established physical facility that gives rise to the act of infringement, or has agreed or consented to be sued in the instant action; an inventor named on the patent conducted research or development; or a party has a regular and established physical facility and has managed significant research and development for the invention claimed in the patent, has manufactured a tangible product alleged to embody that invention, or has implemented a manufacturing process for a tangible good in which the process is alleged to embody the invention.[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr9/summary]
==References==
<ref name="GovTrack"> [https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr9#] 'H.R.9:Innovation Act', ''govtrack.us''. </ref>
