U.S. House Passes Bill to Reform Patent Litigation

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC
Contact

https://www.nyiplitigationreport.com/files/2013/12/dreamstime_m_31546206.jpgThe U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill today called the “Innovation Act,” H.R. 3309, which was aimed at reigning in abusive patent litigation filed by “non-practicing entities (NPEs)” or “patent trolls.”  The bill was introduced on October 23, 2013 by Rep. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia.  Information regarding the bill can be found here.

Key provisions in the bill include:

Pleading requirements:  The bill would require that a party alleging patent infringement disclose more information in its initial complaint than is currently required, and in particular, would require the plaintiff to identify the patents and claims that are allegedly infringed, and to specify how they are being infringed.

Discovery:  The bill would require courts to limit discovery to only the information necessary to determine the meaning of patent terms when the court requires a ruling relating to the construction of terms used in a patent claim asserted in the complaint.

Patent ownership:  The bill would require the plaintiff, upon filing an initial complaint for patent infringement, to provide basic ownership information including the patent assignee, the parent entity of any assignee, any entity with a right to sublicense or enforce the patent, and any entity with a financial interest in the patent.

Customer lawsuits:  The bill would require courts to grant a motion to stay an action against a customer accused of infringing a patent based on a product or process when: (1) the manufacturer is a party to the action or to a separate action involving the same patent related to the same product or process, and (2) the customer agrees to be bound by any judgment entered against such manufacturer.

Fee shifting:  The bill would require courts to award prevailing parties reasonable fees and other expenses incurred in connection with such actions, unless the position of the nonprevailing party was substantially justified or special circumstances made an award unjust.  Also, the bill would allow the court, if a nonprevailing party was unable to pay such fees and expenses, to make the fees and expenses recoverable against any interested party that had been joined to the action.

According to news outlets, the Senate has its own version of the bill and may take that bill up shortly.

We will keep you posted on future developments regarding this legislation.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Bond Schoeneck & King PLLC on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide