“….best solution is to drop Post Grant Review. It does not work well in Europe”

You tell us that Paul Michel “knows whereof he speaks”. On that quote, sorry, he doesn’t.

Mind you, if he had instead written that the EPO system of opposition to duly issued patents will not work well if translated into the USA, I would have agreed. stan, do you think, that’s what he meant to say?

But then again, he’s an ex-Chief Judge. Presumably he chooses his words carefully, and says what he means.

I think it is very safe to say that Cheif Judge Michel knows whereof he speaks, after having spent about 30 years adjudicating similar issues.

Stan~

Best regards,
Stan~

I would like to second your viewpoint. I haven’t found the depth and breadth of patent law coverage that Gene presents anywhere else, and the thoughtful and well-informed discussions here are second to none, as far as I am concerned.

PS to Dan- Sorry to have gotten your first name wrong in my earlier post, and my reference to Ron was in regards a Ron R. that was trying to hinder my attempts.

This forum often publishes a variety of viewpoints, and not only those with which Gene Quinn agrees with. The only time people “get in trouble” here is when they post irresponsibly and without accountability.

I find that the people who are quickest to “bash” this site are also those who have no desire to actually engage in a true conversation regarding patent law. There are plenty of other forums where you can post whatever views you want with little or no thought (or ability to support those views). I find it refreshing to visit here and see great articles, interviews with key players in the patent world, and, in my view, a reasonable guard against the junk that pollutes too many other forums.

Thank you Gene for another great year of patent law coverage and discussion!

Randy,

Why are you surprised? Unless I’m missing something, this article is quite negative about the AIA (the Abominable Inane Act). And I think I can speak for Gene that he’s not an AIA fan (nor am I).

Why nobody else has responded seems a bit scary to me. I tried, tooth and nail, to oppose both the 2007 and 2009 efforts at patent reform, as they would like to say. Both of those efforts were much more draconian than the currently contemplated *America Invents Act* and it’s eventual implementation, which is still currently pending of some technical corrections, as it were.

The really sad part of it, was that an erstwhile respected member of the IP community went very far out of his way to shut my efforts down, on just a mere suspicion. Why couldn’t he have just picked up his phone and called me if he was suspicious of anything?

None of that though, as it might tip his precious hand I suppose. I ended up with about 230 signatories to my letter from independents and practitioners to Congress, but it would have been more like 500 if Ron hadn’t interfered. With the help of a staffer, I was able to file the letter in both the House and Senate records, replete with confirmation letters from both entities.

The 2009 bill passed in the House, but stalled out in the Senate fortunately. His whole reasoning for shutting me down, was that I had been corresponding with the Innovation Alliance seeking help, and that about three words in my letter didn’t say exactly what he wanted them to. He even had the temerity to call me up one day, and ask me how much I had been paid by whoever to try to help patent reform along. I was totally stunned. Et Tu Brute’, and all like that…. It Might have worked, but control freaks don’t like anything they might not be able to snuff whenever they want to.

And then again, there is the America Invents Act of 2011. Almost nobody understood the economics involved, wherein tech companies could easily spend 100 Million, to perhaps prevent a billion dollar loss even 4 years down the road. How much profit do they need, and at what expense? Your 1/10th of one percent estimate is spot on, but most are incredulous when I try to tell them that. For less than one percent of more profit, they would gladly mostly destroy the patent rights of smaller entities, or otherwise make them just go away? I don’t think I would call that America’s finest hour by any stretch of the imagination. What next? De-fang the ITC so they can import whatever they like with no repercussions?

Stan~