May 2008
Patent Reform Act Update (see below - H.R. 1908 was passed in the House in fall 2007; S. 1145 was removed from the Senate calendar in May 2008 for the year). As reported in I/P Watch, "[the bill] will not be added [to the Senate calendar] again until Senator Patrick Leahy (Democrat, Vermont), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, signals Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) that an agreement has been reached on the language. There are other items on the Senate's agenda that must be dealt with before patent reform, which Reid had deemed a priority in January." A Senate aide was quoted in the article as saying "We haven't been able to reach that final agreement … We're not ready for patent reform at this time … [but] patent reform is not off the table."
April 2007
Patent Reform Act (S. 1145 & H.R. 1908 - Introduced concurrently on 4/18/07). "To amend title 35, United States Code, to provide for patent reform." House and Senate members introduced identical legislation on the same day (an update of the Senate bill listed below from the 109th Congress and legislation introduced in August 2006). Among other provisions, the bill would "… award a patent to the first person to file, as opposed to the current system that grants patents to the individual who first invents the product. The bill would allow mandatory application of the "apportionment" rule for calculating damages in a patent lawsuit. Under such a rule, profits from a product are divided based on the percentage attributed to the patented invention. Currently, courts have flexibility in calculating such damages. The bill would also include a system to review already granted patents with a 'second window' provision that would provide challengers another opportunity during the process to disprove a patent's validity." See the press release from Sen. Leahy's office or Rep. Berman's office for a joint statement, individual statements and a section-by-section description of the proposed legislation.
August 2006
Patent Reform Act (S. 3818 - Introduced 8/3/06). "A bill to amend title 35, United States Code, to provide for patent reform." As noted in the press release "[T]he main provisions in Hatch bill focus on increasing patent quality, increasing international harmonization, and decreasing unwarranted or abusive patent litigation: …[Specifically, the bill] … provides a robust post-grant review process so that third parties can challenge suspect patents in an administrative process, rather than through costly litigation … would move patent protection toward a first-to-file rule, which provides greater certainty since the filing date of an application can very rarely be challenged … [and] limits two elements of the litigation system that appear to have little or no justification: willful infringement and inequitable conduct." This bill was introduced in part due to the lack of progress in moving the reform package proposed in summer 2005 (H.R. 2795; see below). See a statement by Senator Hatch.
April 2006
Patents Depend on Quality Act (H.R. 5096- Introduced 4/5/06): "A bill to amend title 35, United States Code, to modify certain procedures relating to patents." See links under H.R. 2795 below for comparisons between this bill (PDQ) and others. This bill addresses many of the issues covered in the early comprehensive patent reform legislation (HR 2795; see below), with language on injunctions and post-grant review procedures. As stated in the press release, "[T]he PDQ Act contains provisions designed to improve patent quality, deter abusive practices by unscrupulous patent 'trolls', and provide meaningful, low-cost alternatives to litigation for challenging patent validity." See below for charts comparing H.R. 5096 and H.R. 2795)
April 2006
Patent Reform Act (H.R. 2795- Introduced 6/8/05): "A bill to amend title 35, United States Code, relating to the procurement, enforcement, and validity of patents." Among its many provisions, includes revisions to the conditions under which a patent may be obtained for an invention, including by: (1) providing for joint research agreements; (2) giving patent priority to the first filed patent application (currently, priority is given to the first invention); and (3) amending provisions related to patents internationally. (NOTE: see the IPO web site for several comparison charts -- see Chart 1 for comparison of proposed legislation versions; see Chart 2 for comparison between H.R. 2795, "Redline" and H.R. 5096 - noted above).
