E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.

Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

Become a Fan

« Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Depomed, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016) | Main | TriVascular, Inc. v. Samuels (Fed. Cir. 2016) »

March 28, 2016

Comments

Good report thanks.
Note, by way of further background, that Congress had never removed the prior special venue statute section for patent suits from the statute books. It is still there. Nor did Congress ever indicate any specific intent to overrule it . Rather a Fed. Cir. panel decision decided that in their view it had been rendered completely inoperative by a change in another [general] venue statute section. Now the pending mandamus argues that the special patent suit venue statute was revived by another such change.

'they contain many provisions that are not narrowly tailored to address the perceived problem of "Patent Trolls." '

That's always been the problem with these patent bills. Infringers whine about problems that seldom if ever exist, or they fictionalize and propose 'reforms' that have far reaching affects and at times have nothing to do with the problems they claim exist. In the end we get the same result, making it harder and more lengthy and expensive to get and enforce patents. For inventors and small entities the patent system is mostly dead. After fighting the PTO for years we find we are unable to enforce the patents we do finally get. Our rights have largely been destroyed.

Don't believe the lies of thieves. just because they call it reform doesn't mean it is.

For our position and the changes we advocate to truly reform the patent system, or to join our effort, please visit us at https://aminventorsforjustice.wordpress.com/category/our-position/
or, contact us at tifj@mail.com

The comments to this entry are closed.

July 2017

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31