Judge Michel Tells Congress Patent Office Should Keep Fees, Provides Views from His Days on Bench

House Judiciary Committee Hears Patent Reform Testimony

          The House Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet, held a hearing entitled, “Crossing the Finish Line on Patent Reform – What Can and Should be Done”, on February 11, 2011.  Former Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Paul Michel, testified on his own behalf. His written statement, published by the Committee, is worth reading for

a number of reasons, including Michel's historical account of the Patent Act and his views on changes in the complexity of the technology disclosed in patents during his tenure on the bench.

          David Simon, Intel's Chief Patent Counsel, testified on behalf of the Coalition for Patent Fairness. Arguing that the Supreme Court's recent opinions had addressed most of CPA's concerns of the past, he asked the Committee to focus patent reform efforts on improving the Patent Office, and in particular the quality of patents being issued (see Simon's testimony here). CPA's specific recommendations include computerizing patent application examination, increasing the budget of the Patent Office's reexamination unit, improving prior user rights provisions of the statute, allowing the Patent Office to set fees and retain fees it generates, and providing post-grant oppositions.

          Carl Horton, Chief Intellectual Property Counsel at General Electric, testified on behalf of the Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform.

 

Tech Council Urges IP Legislation for Clean Technology

     In its 2009 Policy Platform for Technology and Biotechnology published earlier this month, the Technology Council of Maryland (TCM) called for funding and targeted legislation for the state's technology and biotechnology industries, but also urged incentives, financing, tax credits and intellectual property legislation "that will spur the potential for making Maryland a leader in clean and green technology."  The TCM is Maryland's largest technology trade association (500+ members). 

     Does Maryland need incentives to encourage the development of clean and green technologies? If the number of clean energy patents issued to Marylanders is any indication, the answer is yes.  According to U.S. Patent Office data, there were only 11 patents issued in 2008 naming at least one Maryland resident as an inventor that disclosed "fuel cell" (down from 17 in 2007), 11 patents to Maryland inventors that disclosed "hybrid", "electric," and "vehicle" in 2008 (up from 7 in 2007), and only one patent to Maryland inventors that disclosed "wind power" in 2008 (half as many as the 2 patents issued in 2007). Although that snapshot view is far from a scientific and robust analysis, it seems that Maryland trails other states in clean technology innovation (Michigan, for example, received a total of 29 clean energy patents in the 3Q 2008 alone, and New York received 21 in 3Q 2008, according to data published by the Clean Energy Patent Growth Index).