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


« Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. (2011) | Main | America Invents Act: Quo Vadis? »

June 07, 2011


"not pass constitutional muster"

Manzullo and Roberts are right. But there are many other problems with the bill -so many that it should be scrapped completely and permanently.

Just because they call it “reform” doesn’t mean it is. Patent reform is a fraud on America. This bill will not do what they claim it will. What it will do is help large multinational corporations maintain their monopolies by robbing and killing their small entity and startup competitors (so it will do exactly what the large multinationals paid for) and with them the jobs they would have created. According to recent studies by the Kauffman Foundation and economists at the U.S. Census Bureau, “startups aren’t everything when it comes to job growth. They’re the only thing.” This bill is a wholesale slaughter of US jobs. Those wishing to help in the fight to defeat this bill should contact us as below.

Small entities and inventors have been given far too little voice on this bill when one considers that they rely far more heavily on the patent system than do large firms who can control their markets by their size alone. The smaller the firm, the more they rely on patents -especially startups and individual inventors. Yet small entities create the lion's share of new jobs.

Please see http://truereform.piausa.org/ for a different/opposing view on patent reform.


Once more, Congress reneges on its promise not to divert user fees from the USPTO. Addington from the Heritage Foundation made a particularly misleading statement about Rogers and Ryan's proposal which confuses "appropriation" (which spending of user fees is not) with "authorization" (which is what would happen in allowing the USPTO to spend all user fees it has earned). I am a Republican but I'm dismayed (and angered) by what Rogers and Ryan (who is pretty savvy and should know better the difference between "appropriation" and "authorization") propose. The diverted fees are a drop in the bucket for getting us out of our huge national debt, but are large enough to impact significantly the USPTO's operation. My view on H.R. 1249/S. 23 remains unchanged: this so-called "patent law reform" is a sham and calling this legislation the America Invents Act is oxymoronic.

The comments to this entry are closed.

November 2023

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