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.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

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

Contact the Docs


  • "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.
Juristat #8 Overall Rank


« Time Magazine on Data Exclusivity Debate | Main | Follow-on Biologics Data Exclusivity Debate Scorecard - Part I »

October 27, 2009


Well, when I read all that pragmatic stuff, about inter partes proceedings being inappropriate to the PTO and better handled in the courtroom, I get even more convinced that an ex parte system that duly issues patents with a Presumption of Validity, which validity can be disturbed only when the petitioner has "clear and convincing" evidence of invalidity, is not an optimal balance between the class of patent owners trying to intimidate, and the class of employers, trying to earn an honest crust out of making and selling things.


I kept hoping that the health care debate in Congress would distract them from S. 515/H.R. 1260. The health care debate could still sink this so-called "patent law reform" beneath the morass. I hope eternal!

The comments to this entry are closed.

July 2024

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