By Kevin E. Noonan --
The Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) issued two press releases today, concerning the "patent reform" bill pending in the Senate (S. 1145) and District Court Judge Cacheris' decision in Tafas/GSK v. Dudas.
In the first press release, BIO President and CEO Jim Greenwood (at left) responded to the claims by the so-called Coalition for Patent Fairness that S. 1145 is coming to a vote on the Senate floor in the next few weeks. Mr. Greenwood challenged this assertion, saying that BIO has been working on the bill with several Senators and other stakeholders, and was unaware of any "deal" or consensus that would make the bill ready for passage. "A wide range of industries, labor unions and universities continue to have serious concerns about key provisions" of the bill, according to BIO, specifically reciting provisions regarding damages, post-grant review, and inequitable conduct. BIO also cautioned that "[t]he potential negative impact of a poorly crafted bill on the U.S. economy and global competitiveness is too great" for the Senate to rush the bill for a floor vote until and unless the bill "will truly enhance" the U.S. patent system.
BIO pledged to continue to work with the Senate to try to reach a compromise on the bill.
The second press release concerned the Tafas/GSK decision, granting summary judgment against the Patent Office and the "new rules" regarding limitations on continuation applications and the number of claims the Office would consider. BIO called for a "balanced solution" to the Office's pendency backlog, while hailing the ruling as a "sound decision." BIO asserted that the rules would have "inhibited the ability of biotechnology innovators to obtain adequate patent protection on their technologies, significantly decreasing their ability to attract the financing necessary to bring innovative, life-enhancing and life-saving products to market."
Even so, BIO stressed that there remained a need to "develop a viable and workable solution to the legitimate workload challenge at the PTO," and pledged to "stand ready to work with the PTO to develop an approach that fairly allocates responsibility for patent quality between patent applicants and patent examiners and enhances the strength and integrity of the American patent system, while not stifling innovation or placing a disproportionate burden on any one industry."
BIO's amicus brief for the Tafas/GSK case is available here.
Comments