Bipartisan patent reform legislation was introduced Wednesday by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking member Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., along with committee members John Cornyn, R-Texas; Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; Mike Lee, R-Utah; Orrin Hatch, R-Utah; and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn. The Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship Act, or Patent Act, would “make necessary and commonsense reforms to restore the integrity of the U.S. patent system,” a media advisory said Tuesday. The Patent Act “makes common sense reforms,” Grassley said at a news conference Wednesday. “We’ve been working together on this bill for two years,” Leahy said. “We refused to give up,” he said. “There will be people who oppose this bill,” Schumer said, but “I’m confident this is the year we will finally pass patent reform,” he said. “The president is for patent reform,” as are Republicans and Democrats, Cornyn said. This bill levels the playing field, Schumer said. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., said he was “encouraged” by the Senate’s introduction of the bill . “While differences remain between the Innovation Act, which I introduced in the House earlier this year, and the Senate bill, I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact strong, meaningful reforms to curb patent litigation abuses,” Goodlatte said. Adobe Vice President-IP and Litigation Dana Rao and Biotechnology Industry Organization CEO Jim Greenwood said in a news release from Hatch's office that they support the legislation. The Patent and Trademark Office is happy Congress "is actively pursuing legislative efforts to curtail abusive patent infringement litigation practices,” said Director Michelle Lee at another event Wednesday (see 1504290031). CEA and other tech groups were quick to line up Wednesday hailing the bill’s introduction. CEA President Gary Shapiro in a statement said the "common-sense bill" will close "legal loopholes used by those who abuse our patent system." Shapiro said the measure "will stop the legalized extortion of American innovators by patent trolls," who he defined as "individuals or companies that do not manufacture products or supply services, but exist solely to demand payments, threaten litigation and file frivolous lawsuits against those who do." The IT Industry Council, speaking for the "tech sector," is pleased "to see a bipartisan effort emerge in the Senate to put the brakes on patent trolls,” President Dean Garfield said in a statement. “The integrity of the U.S. intellectual property system is essential to advancing cutting-edge breakthroughs. But patent trolls have become a multi-billion dollar industry based on exploiting flaws in the patent system to extort money from legitimate patent holders, including startups and tech companies, through frivolous lawsuits. These needed reforms will help stop abusive patent litigation, which drains money that should be used to invest in entrepreneurship, innovation, and job creation.” The Software & Information Industry Association regards the bill as “an important step forward on patent reform that we believe will be effective in curtailing abusive litigation,” Vice President-Public Policy Mark MacCarthy said in a statement. “We strongly support the provisions that will improve transparency, create higher pleading standards, and enforce limits on document discovery. While we see areas for improvement, we believe that the combination of these components creates a strong reform package.” Public Knowledge has "long awaited the day when the Senate would unveil its proposal for patent reform,” said Charles Duan, director of the group’s Patent Reform Project, in a statement: “Abusive patent assertion harms the entire public. ... When bad patents and unfair litigation tactics are combined into a blunt weapon, targeting core everyday technologies, the people directly suffer the consequences. By leveling the playing field of patent litigation in several areas, this bill should protect the technology-consuming public from the harms that patent trolls and other abusers cause.”

Congress plays a critical role in driving innovation and economic growth, said U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director Michelle Lee at a Congressional Caucus on Intellectual Property and Piracy Protection event Wednesday. Protecting patents, trademarks and copyrights provides incentives to invent and create, protects innovators and creates a platform for financial investment in innovation, Lee said, according to the text of her remarks. A Department of Commerce report said IP-intensive industries support more than 40 million jobs and contribute more than $5 trillion to the U.S. gross domestic product, she said. “The work that we do at the USPTO is more important than ever,” Lee said. “Our focus on the highest level of quality is why we recently launched a new Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative,” she said according to written remarks. “We are pleased that Congress is actively pursuing legislative efforts to curtail abusive patent infringement litigation practices,” and “undertaking a review of copyright law,” she said. “Abusive tactics have no place in our patent system,” as they “divert resources away from the research, development and innovation that fuel our nation’s economic growth,” Lee said. Abusive tactics are “particularly harmful to startups and small businesses who lack the resources and expertise to properly defend themselves,” Lee said, which is why “legislation to curtail abusive patent litigation and bad faith threats of litigation is both necessary and appropriate.” Also Wednesday, bipartisan patent legislation was introduced by Senate Judiciary Committee members (see 1504290028).

In an attempt to reduce “friction” in the patent market, Google is inviting patent holders to sell their patents to Google, Google Deputy General Counsel-Patents Allen Lo wrote in a blog post Monday. “The usual patent marketplace can sometimes be challenging, especially for smaller participants who sometimes end up working with patent trolls.” Lawsuits, wasted efforts and bad karma can happen without “any meaningful benefit to the original patent owner,” he said. Google’s Patent Purchase Promotion will be open May 8-22. Patent holders will be able to tell Google about the patents they’re willing to sell at a set price, Lo said. After the portal closes, Google will review the submissions and let patent holders know by June 26 if Google is interested in buying the patent, Lo said. “There’s some fine print that you absolutely want to make sure you fully understand before participating,” Lo said, which is why Google recommended participants speak with an attorney. More information on the experimental Patent Purchase Promotion is on Google’s Patent Website.

Patent and surveillance overhaul may come up in the months ahead for the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, told reporters at the National Press Club Monday. Grassley anticipates introducing patent overhaul legislation that’s “more comprehensive than just dealing with demand letters” in two to three weeks if not sooner, he said. “It will not be like the House bill.” The legislation will involve no presumption in fee shifting and will be “probably less strict on pleading and discovery,” he said. “Demand letters, it may be about the same.” But “you ought to know who’s suing you,” he said. Much is “in flux” when it comes to possible legislation to curb government phone surveillance, Grassley said. “I’m still talking to members of the Intelligence Committee.” He decided not to join House lawmakers, who originally planned to introduce a bill limiting surveillance authorities last week but did not. “Maybe they’re having second thoughts,” Grassley said, saying he’s still looking at a possible “compromise between Judiciary and Intelligence.”

In a 10-7 vote, the Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade sent forward the Targeting Rogue and Opaque Letters Act (TROL Act) Wednesday, a House Commerce Committee news release said. “The TROL Act is a balanced solution to stop the practice of fraudulent and abusive patent demand letters, while preserving the ability of patent holders to legitimately protect their intellectual property,” the release said. “Abusive patent assertion entities (PAEs), or patent trolls, unfairly target small businesses and cost American companies tens of billions of dollars every year by threatening litigation. The TROL act seeks to increase transparency and accountability in patent demand letters and provides the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) with the authority to levy fines on bad actors that send deceptive demand letters.” Subcommittee Chairman Michael Burgess, R-Texas, said the committee would continue to work to strengthen the legislation and encouraged stakeholders to participate. Committee ranking member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said he wouldn't support the bill because it “creates a disincentive to enforcement by tying the hands of state attorneys general and by creating barriers to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) enforcement that are simply too high.” The bill “would completely pre-empt the 20 laws that expressly address abusive patent assertion communications” and “severely constrains states’ ability to take an active role by limiting available remedies and placing an arbitrary cap on civil penalties,” Pallone said at the markup, according to opening remarks. “Just like with the data breach bill, if Congress seeks to pre-empt specific state laws -- especially on issues on which the states have been leaders fighting unfair and deceptive acts, such as false and misleading demand letters -- the federal effort should be at least as strong as those state laws,” Pallone said. Four amendments were introduced for the bill. One by Burgess was accepted on a voice vote, another was withdrawn. Amendments proposed by Democrats Jan Schakowsky of Illinois and Joseph Kennedy of Massachusetts were defeated on a partisan roll call vote.

Most so-called patent trolls “don’t produce anything, they just shake down anyone who does,” comedian John Oliver said in an 11-minute segment Sunday on his HBO show Last Week Tonight that poked satirical fun at the patent abuse problem. “So calling them trolls is a little misleading. At least trolls actually do something. They control bridge access for goats and ask people fun riddles. Patent trolls just threaten to sue the living shit out of people, and believe me, those lawsuits add up.” Patent trolls have manipulated the system down "to such a science," Oliver said. For example, in seeking lucrative patent infringement settlements, patent trolls “work out the maximum amount of money you’d be willing to pay, rather than go to court and negotiate for that,” he said. “They pick a number the same way airlines pick a cabin temperature -- perfectly calibrated to make you miserable, but not so much that you’d actually do anything about it.” Oliver also took aim at the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Texas, which patent reform advocates have criticized as notoriously friendly to frivolous patent lawsuits. “A quarter of all patent cases are filed in Marshall, Texas,” he said. “And believe me, it is not because the people there are inventing like a meth head in a Home Depot aisle.” Saying trial lawyer lobbyists killed the last congressional attempt at patent reform, Oliver said: “You cannot let trial lawyers decide whether there should be more baseless lawsuits. That’s the equivalent of trusting raccoons to make laws about garbage-can placements.”

The House Judiciary Committee plans a hearing for 2 p.m. Tuesday on the Innovation Act (HR-9), the patent reform bill by House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. “This legislation, which passed the House last year by a wide margin, is designed to eliminate the abuses of our patent system, discourage frivolous patent litigation and keep U.S. patent laws up to date,” Goodlatte said. “I am hopeful we can move quickly here in the House and get this important legislation through the Senate and to the President’s desk.” Witnesses include Patent and Trademark Office Director Michelle Lee on the first panel. Witnesses on the second panel include Yahoo Deputy General Counsel-Intellectual Property Kevin Kramer, former Eli Lilly General Counsel Robert Armitage, Salesforce.com Senior Vice President-Intellectual Property David Simon and Biotechnology Industry Organization Deputy General Counsel-Intellectual Property Hans Sauer.

Public Knowledge and 27 other groups and legal scholars sent a letter to the International Trade Commission Friday “opposing a recent decision that the Commission has authority to block internet data transmissions,” a Public Knowledge news release said. The decision giving ITC the authority to “block the importation of copyright- and patent-infringing products extends to an ability to block Internet data transmissions into the United States,” the release said. “By declaring that all digital data transfers are subject to the ITC’s purview, the Commission forces every business, small and large, who exchanges data over the Internet to contemplate the possibility of being brought before the ITC,” said Public Knowledge Director-Patent Reform Project Charles Duan. “Our concern was starkly heightened when we learned last December that the MPAA intends to use this ruling to force Internet Service Providers to perform website blocking,” Duan said. The letter “asks the ITC to rethink its position on blocking Internet content,” Duan said. ITC had no immediate comment.

Six weeks after 145 U.S. universities wrote Congress expressing opposition to the Innovation Act (HR-9) as a measure that goes “well beyond what is needed” to address patent abuse (see 1502250046), CEA wrote those universities urging them to reconsider. CEA views the bill as “fair, common-sense legislation that would curb abusive patent litigation by patent trolls, while protecting inventors, innovative companies, research institutions and licensors such as universities,” it said Wednesday in a statement. “It is disappointing to see universities reject common-sense reform, especially since many universities are licensing publicly funded patents,” said CEA President Gary Shapiro. Contrary to the universities’ concerns, the bill “would create a clear standard for shifting fees in patent cases, which isn’t a significant departure from the fee shifting provision that has existed in U.S. patent law since 1946,” Shapiro said. Litigation fees would be shifted in patent cases only if “the position and conduct of the non-prevailing party or parties” weren't “reasonably justified in law and fact,” he said. It’s also unlikely that any university “would ever be in a position to be affected by the joinder requirements in the Innovation Act,” Shapiro said, addressing another of the schools’ concerns. “This provision will apply only to cases brought by entities that exist for the sole purpose of litigating a patent.”

LG’s G3 and its other Android smartphones with one or more map apps violate a U.S. patent held by Porto Technology, a Korean company, Porto alleged in an infringement complaint filed Friday. The complaint is noteworthy for the U.S. District Court in Marshall, Texas, venue in which it was filed. The Marshall court is part of the Eastern District of Texas that came under fire from CEA in February after Apple was handed a $532.9 million defeat in a jury verdict in Tyler, Texas, prompting CEA President Gary Shapiro to blast the district as “notoriously” friendly to “patent trolls” (see 1502260047). In the LG case, Porto alleges LG violated U.S. patent 6,233,518, which describes a method and system for “Providing an Image Vector-Based Traffic Information,” the complaint said. The patent was granted in May 2001 listing Heung-Soo Lee as the inventor and original assignee, though the complaint lists Ji-Soo Lee as the “owner by assignment” and says Porto is the patent’s exclusive licensee. LG didn’t comment.