Judge Michel tells Congress it isnt helpful to talk about quality, patents are either valid or invalid IPWatchdog. Rep. Darrell Issa R CA, Chairman of House IP Subcommittee. The July 1. 3th hearing on the effects of bad patents on American businesses held by the House Judiciary Committees Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property and the Internet has been very enlightening despite the one sided nature of that days hearing. During the hearing, Rep. Darrell Issa R CA tried to exert political pressure on a member of the federal judiciary, an act which prompted a strong rebuke from the American Board of Trial Advocates. Release Notes for the Cisco ASA Series, Version 9. First Published July 24, 2014. Last Updated July 12, 2016. This document contains release information for. HTML/default/images/sdm2.png' alt='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' title='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' />Improve your productivity and save time. Let your system work for you. SASPairs/Images/HowDoI/AutoX.gif' alt='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' title='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' />A closer look at the panel witnesses providing testimony that day, aside from former Chief Judge Paul Michel, leads one to wonder if anyone in Congress is actually interested in having a substantive dialogue about the U. S. patent system. At the start of that days questioning period, Rep. Invalid Member Name For File Sas' title='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' />Lamar Smith R TX, member of the House IP subcommittee and chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space, Technology, asked how adept patent trolls have been at responding to measures enacted by the America Invents Act AIA of 2. Advantage Database Server 10 Crack. U. S. Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC. Julie Samuels of Engine Advocacy noted that, initially after the passage of the AIA, litigation rates went up initially. Of course, that has more to do with joinder provisions of the AIA and the inability to file a single suit against multiple defendants a hard look at the data shows that the AIA didnt alter actual litigation rates in any significant way. Samuels, taking a position which likely made her funders at Google proud, cited low quality patents in the high tech space as being largely responsible for the majority of new cases being filed against unique defendants, small companies. Samuels was very excited for a few weeks after the TC Heartland decision was issued up until Judge Rodney Gilstraps decision in Raytheon v. Crayto deny a motion to transfer venue out of the Eastern District of Texas E. D. Tex. Our experience is that the Eastern District is deliberately undermining many of the reforms that have been pursued, said Tom Lee of Mapbox, a company whose only experience includes a total of one patent infringement suit filed against it in the Western District of Texas W. D. Tex. I think the core of the problem is that most of the 8,3. Chief Judge Paul Michel, the one panel witness who made any substantive comments during the days hearing. Patent scope involves claim construction, which means people who understand claim construction case law can do it right. Judge Michel also suggested that training and supervising examiners on specification as codified by 3. U. S. C. 1. 12 could help examiners limit the scope of invention more effectively, resulting in higher quality patents being issued. I think at the end of the day, patents are either valid or invalid as a legal instrument and therefore its not very helpful to talk about quality or good or bad, Judge Michel said. Theyre either valid or not valid and with respect to someone practicing the technology, the patent is either infringed as properly construed or it is not infringed. Rep. Blake Farenthold R TX asked Judge Michel the kinds of surgical changes which could be made to the U. S. patent system which wouldnt weaken the entire system. Judge Michel argued that fee shifting provisions could help reduce any litigation seen as unnecessary. If I file a frivolous lawsuit against you, the federal trial judge should force me to pay your costs and fees as well as my own when he throws the case out, Judge Michel said. Farenthold put the question on fee shifting to the rest of the panel and no one objected to fee shifting as a bad idea. Judge Michel further critiqued the way in which the U. S. Patent and Trademark Offices Patent Trial and Appeal Board PTAB conducted its business, noting that the agency didnt seem to be following Congressional statute as laid out by the AIA. As I read the statute, the intent was to have policy officials and their subordinates review the intake part and the Board only make the final written decision, Judge Michel said. Isaac%20M%20Harris/Microsoft-Office-Customization-Installing-Office-customization.jpeg' alt='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' title='Invalid Member Name For File Sas' />But both have been bucked over to the Board, and I dont think the Board has the ability to focus on the policy considerations that are in the statute. Software patents, which regularly draw the ire of the efficient infringement crowd, were a subject of debate at the days hearing. Rep. Jerrold Nadler D NY asked the panel how the USPTO could improve software patents. My hope and expectation is that the Patent Office wont be granting frivolous ones in the future, Lee said. There needs to be a recognition that software innovation happens too quickly for the patent system to keep up with it. Lee further mentioned that software enjoys other intellectual property protections, like copyright, license agreements and trade secrets. My personal opinion is that it would be a much better system if we did not patent software, Lee said. I know that many, if not most, software engineers share that opinion. Former Chief Judge Paul MichelI think the problem is that the category is too broad, Judge Michel said. Its not true that all software related patents are bad. Its not true that all business type methods are bad. Some are very bad, some are borderline, and some are rock solid. The categorization of patents as software or non software innovation wasnt nearly as important to Judge Michel as addressing significant issues with patent examination or AIA trial processes. Nadler then questioned Sean Reilly of The Clearing House why covered business method CBM reviews at the PTAB should be extended CBMs were originally envisioned as an eight year program. Reilly, citing his own experience as a patent examiner at the USPTO, said the problem being solved by CBM review was not a temporary problem and that financial organizations needed a viable alternative to U. S. district court. Further, CBM enabled a path towards challenging invalidity under 3. U. S. C. 1. 01, as well as Section 1. IPR. If those grounds for invalidity were able to be challenged in IPRs, Reilly conceded that CBMs wouldnt be necessary. Smart Card Writer Software there. Later, Issa pressed Judge Michel on a point he had made earlier on unifying the standards on patent validity between district court and trials at the PTAB. Since validity is a legal question, I would make the Patent Office standards and procedures conformed to those used in court, Judge Michel said. For example, the PTAB would have to use accurate construction of claims and not the broadest reasonable interpretation, which Judge Michel called hopelessly vague and hopelessly lax. Issa noted that, if only one standard were to be applied, that increases the pressure on the examination process and the examiners who sometimes have little information, much of which is presented by the patent applicant. Bodyguards Guardie Del Corpo. I think thats going to perpetuate the problem further if we go with that approach, Reilly said. Issa went further into Judge Michels suggestion on unifying the standards between PTAB and the district court level, discussing a hypothetical in which one party brings a validity challenge based on prior art information which was not available at the examination phase.