Posts Tagged: "pto director"

A group of private companies, professional associations, conservative policy organizations, and investors/commercializers sent a letter to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross urging the Trump Administration to pick as the next Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office someone who “recognizes the value of patents in connection with growth of the U.S. economy, and grasps the fundamental fact that a patent secures a property right.” Headlining this coalition is the American Conservative Union, Conservatives for Property Rights, Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, and IEEE-USA.

Conventional wisdom in patent political circles says Iancu, but the pro-patent community has long supported Phil Johnson, although not in a particularly vocal or effective way. With a Koch backed entity like the Taxpayers Protection Alliance getting involved there is no doubt Johnson’s chances have been enhanced. If other Republican donors, operatives and think tanks were to follow the deal that may have seemed like a done deal for Iancu might quickly become not so much a done deal after all. In other words, if pro-patent Republicans get off the bench to support Johnson there might just be a July surprise.

The Supreme Court has long stated patents are property rights, and the statute says they are to be treated as they are property rights. Taking property rights away with such a fundamentally flawed process is practically un-American… It is absolutely essential for the President to pick someone who believes patents are private property rights, not public rights. The next Director should also believe that as a property right title in a patent must at some point quiet in order for ownership to be certain and investment to be property incentivized, because without ownership questions resolved only a fool would invest the sums necessary to take most paradigm shifting, game changing innovation to market.

Overall, incoming USPTO leadership must have the capacity to see the “big picture” and weigh options for improving our innovation economy. Recognition that recent changes have weakened the patent system too much, and the leadership ability to make changes that achieve the appropriate balance between enforcing strong patents and limiting abusive enforcement of meritless patents, should be criteria in selecting the next Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO.

It is imperative that the next PTO Director hold certain fundamental believes. At a minimum, the next Director must: (1) View issued patents as an important and valuable private property right; (2) Believe issued patents are entitled to the statutory presumption of validity in all forums; and (3) Be committed to fundamentally reforming post grant procedures in order to guarantee both procedural and substantive fairness.

If the Washington, DC rumor mill is correct Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross will soon announce that Andrei Iancu will be the next Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Sources say an announcement could come as early as the beginning of July. Still, it has been difficult to determine whether those within the rumor mill, which have been in complete agreement on Iancu being the pick, is well informed or simply echoing what everyone else is saying. Regardless, at this point too many indicators are pointing toward Iancu being the pick, with rumors also circulating that he is currently being vetted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

Above all, LES recommends appointing a Director dedicated to protecting intellectual property, generally, and patents in particular, as the private property right our nation’s founders envisioned. The founders saw great value in rewarding individuals who toil to bring forth from commonly accessible resources useful products and processes by granting to those individuals an enforceable property right. They recognized that such a property right would, in the fullness of time, work a substantial benefit to the public by encouraging innovation and disclosure. We must honor that philosophy. It contributed substantially to America’s rapid ascendancy from agrarian economy to industrial powerhouse, and can be traced to America’s first patent act of 1792. In affording that private property right, we reward and empower the archetypal American innovator, the individual daring to risk all to bring forth the next big thing, and thereby challenge market incumbents who benefit from stasis and the status quo.

The future of America’s innovation economy hangs in the balance. It is time for the patent community to call on the Administration to select someone with the ”right stuff.” … All these ills can be addressed effectively by the PTO’s new Director, provided they have the necessary management experience, patent savvy, and leadership skills. Someone like me who has not run anything larger than a courthouse may lack the needed capabilities, as may someone who has run nothing larger than a litigation team or small law firm. Same for the gifted academics who provide such useful commentary on all matters patent. Same with former Capitol Hill staffers(I was once one myself). They all have their place, but it is not at the helm of America’s 13,000 person innovation agency.

An ideal candidate for the next head of the USPTO would be someone who understands that patents are property not public rights, that issued patents are valid until otherwise proven invalid, and that recent changes in patent law and decisions from the Supreme Court have significantly diminished the historic strength of the US patent system. The candidate should pledge to make the US patent system strong again by working to correct the wrongs that have enveloped the patent system during the past few years, particularly the PTAB panels. The UIA would support someone that who considers independent inventors, innovators and entrepreneurs valued USPTO shareholders and a cornerstone for economic growth.

Inside the beltway Matal is a well known entity, having served as a Staffer in the Senate and responsible for ushering the America Invents Act (AIA) through the Senate… we are hearing some say that Matal has no patent experience, which is simply not true. While we have not always agreed with Matal (particularly during the AIA debates) there is no doubt that he does have sufficient patent experience for the position, although not patent prosecution experience. Matal is likable, knowledgable, and has been a key assistant to several powerful Republican Senators. While the track record of Staffers coming to run the USPTO many not be great in the opinion of many patent practitioners, Matal taking over the Office in the interim should be well received by politicos who have wanted loyalists to be put in positions of authority at agencies.

The legacy of Michelle Lee will be extremely complicated. She has been loved by those in the tech community most associated with using patented technologies (i.e., infringers) and reviled by innovators who need strong patent protections. Her speeches have always been full of rhetoric that leads many observers to believe she is not in favor of strong patent rights, so her departure will undoubtedly be welcome in many corners of the industry and could signal a new pro-patent approach on the horizon for the Trump Administration.

U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross has named U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Associate Solicitor Joseph Matal to perform the functions and duties of the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO. The position is effective June 7, 2017 and follows the resignation of Michelle K. Lee. Matal will serve in this role during the nomination and confirmation process for a new Director.

Michelle Lee sent an e-mail to employees of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) notifying recipients that she had submitted a letter of resignation. There is no word at this hour about who will replace Lee, or whether her resignation will take place effective immediately, although the e-mail sent to USPTO employees does seem to suggest that Lee’s time at the USPTO is over.

Michelle Lee’s days seem numbered at the Patent Office. According to credible sources, Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross has been interviewing perspective candidates for the position of Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). One of the individuals receiving an interview this week was Phil Johnson, former Vice-President for Intellectual Property Strategy & Policy for Johnson & Johnson, and a past President of the Intellectual Property Owners Association.

By letter dated March 10, 2017, the USPTO responded to Mr. Shuster’s FOIA request by informing him that “Michelle K. Lee is the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.” This is the first confirmation from anyone at the USPTO, or from anyone within the Executive Branch. There still has not been an official announcement from the USPTO, Department of Commerce, or White House. Up until today the best evidence that Lee remained as Director had been that she allowed herself to be introduced as “Director of the USPTO” at an industry event and gave opening remarks at the most recent PPAC public meeting… But the more immediate question now becomes: How long will Michelle Lee remain Director of the USPTO?