IP Policy Roundup | Edition 30

C4IP Q&A Series: John Cabeca

C4IP is launching a new Q&A series to periodically spotlight the insights and interests of our coalition’s leaders and other prominent IP advocates. This month, we caught up with our new Chief Operating Officer, John Cabeca. From global IP dynamics to policy roadblocks to favorite places he’s visited — John shares his thoughts below:

C4IP: What first drew you to the IP space?
John: That was a long time ago, but it was sheer luck. I first learned about IP when a friend of mine from college shared my resume with her supervisor at the USPTO for a patent examiner vacancy. I got the job. That was in 1989. The USPTO turned out to be a great place to work, and I ended up working there for over 35 years (not surprisingly, my college friend is still there!). Working on patents opened a curiosity in me to learn more about all aspects of IP, which quickly evolved into a dynamic and fulfilling career working as a senior leader across the IP ecosystem.

C4IP: You’ve worked extensively on IP issues at the regional, national, and international levels for over three decades. How have your varied experiences at the USPTO — including as an IP attaché — shaped your perspective on global innovation and IP rights? 
John: I am very fortunate to have had a career filled with unique opportunities and experiences that have broadened my perspectives on IP. I’ve had the privilege of serving as Chief of Staff for the USPTO Under Secretary, launching and leading the USPTO’s regional office in Silicon Valley, contributing to trade negotiations with the USTR, engaging with members of Congress on IP reforms, and being appointed as an IP diplomat in the most populous region in the world. These experiences reaffirmed for me the critical importance of strong IP systems, their relationship to trade and the economy, and the need to protect IP globally. I have also spent decades working at the heart of American ingenuity with independent inventors and startups. Given the critical role they play in advancing technologies and contributing to a country’s economic growth and stability, I’m convinced that a balanced approach to IP policies is absolutely essential. This means fostering an IP system that embraces creativity, levels the playing field, and incentivizes innovation without stifling it.

C4IP: What do you see as the biggest challenge facing the IP policy space today? Is there a common misconception about IP that makes addressing it more difficult?
John: Expanding on my earlier comment, maintaining balance in our IP system is important for so many reasons. In recent years, however, targeted approaches to offset that balance threaten to harm our system, which ultimately harms our economy. For example, efforts to oversimplify complex patent law with catchy terms intentionally aim to confuse the public and misinform lawmakers to seek reforms that ultimately weaken patent rights and cripple innovators’ ability to defend against IP theft. To the extent practicable, balance on IP is also needed throughout the world. Harmonizing IP systems globally is important, not only for the sake of protecting innovation but also for its contribution to economic growth and the strengthening of international relationships.

C4IP: What excites you most about joining C4IP?
John: I joined C4IP because I firmly stand behind its mission and its drive to keep IP rights strong and enforceable. This should be no surprise given the two Chairmen of the Board are pillars of the intellectual property community, David Kappos and Andrei Iancu. Having worked closely with both of them when they were at the helm of the USPTO during their respective tenures as Under Secretary, I couldn’t pass up the opportunity and privilege to work with them again. I also value the chance to collaborate with the exceptional C4IP team and our top-notch board, members, and advisors. We have a lot of work to do if we are going to stem the tide of those who seek to weaken our IP system.

C4IP: If you could have lunch with any inventor — past or present — who would it be and why?
John: I have been honored to meet many prolific inventors and National Inventors Hall of Fame inductees over the years, so I’ll pick one from the past – Leonardo da Vinci. I believe da Vinci epitomizes the ‘left brain/right brain’ concept as a master in both art and science. While I am no master, I am often told I possess left/right brain traits. The conversation over lunch would surely be interesting, but I’d like to think we would both enjoy the process of making the lunch more than actually sitting down to eat it.

C4IP: What has been your favorite place to visit, and what’s the best piece of travel advice you’ve ever received?
John: Take the spiritual journey. Whether you are in India experiencing the Aarti fire ceremony at dusk on the banks of the Ganges or circling the Golden Temple under a full moon, or off exploring the beautifully ornate cathedrals, mosques, and temples across Asia, Europe and the Middle East, even if you aren’t looking for it, you will find inspiration. While it’s difficult to name one place that stands out for me, completing the challenging trek to Bhutan’s Tiger’s Nest high in the Himalayas came with a great sense of accomplishment and further deepened this sense of peace, reflection, and shared humanity.

C4IP: What’s a fun fact about you that most people might not know?
John: My first job during High School was with a family friend who was also a master craftsman working on a large-scale project. I spent the summer helping to build a plaster replica of the Great Seal of the United States and large colonial columns for installation in the Benjamin Franklin Diplomatic Dining Room at the State Department. I always felt very connected to this room, and even though I have been in the State Department building many times throughout my career, I never had the chance to see it in person. Nearly 40 years later, I was at the State Department again, this time as a diplomat about to depart to India as the IP Counselor for South Asia. The team surprised me with a private tour of the dining room. That was a full circle moment for me – envisioning the amazing diplomatic events and conversations that happen in that room, to following in my father’s footsteps as a diplomat, embarking halfway across the world in support of my country.

March Coalition Updates

March was a busy month for C4IP! We added to our leadership and engaged in advocacy on a variety of issues, from patent eligibility for AI inventions to the enforcement of U.S. patent rights abroad. Here’s a roundup of all that we accomplished over the past month:

• On April 26, C4IP will celebrate World IP Day! This year’s celebrations will focus on the importance of IP protection in music. Stay tuned for more details on how C4IP plans to commemorate this important annual recognition of IP.
• On April 2, C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos will deliver the keynote address at the 5th Annual Boston Intellectual Property Law Association (BIPLA) Symposium in Boston, MA. More information about the event is available here.
• On April 1, C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu, Board Member Judge Paul Michel (ret.), and Chief Policy Officer Jamie Simpson will feature in panel discussions on innovation, national security, and IP policy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ (CSIS) conference, LeadershIP 2025. More information about the event is available here.
• On March 28, C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu, Board Member Judge Paul Michel (ret.), and Advisory Board Member Walt Copan led a panel discussion on a new CSIS report that details how the Trump administration can advance national security and economic prosperity by protecting IP.
• On March 18, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen submitted public comments to the USPTO expressing concern about a proposed World Intellectual Property Organization treaty that would require patent applicants to disclose the origin of genetic resources and traditional knowledge used in their inventions, creating bureaucratic barriers that would jeopardize innovation.
• On March 17, C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu spoke on the Two Mikes Live podcast about the threats to IP he dealt with as USPTO Director during President Trump’s first term and the IP challenges the Trump administration is facing now.
• On March 17, C4IP announced that John Cabeca, a longtime IP advocate with over 30 years of experience at the USPTO — including as chief of staff to C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos during the latter’s tenure as USPTO Director — has joined C4IP as Chief Operations Officer.
  • John’s appointment was reported in Politico’s Influence newsletter.
• On March 13, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen submitted public comments to the U.S. International Trade Commission explaining why the existence of RAND commitments on a patent should not undermine the commission’s authority or willingness to block the importation of infringing products.
  • C4IP’s comments were referenced in a Law360 article summarizing many of the high-profile comments sent to the ITC.
• On March 12, C4IP released the final video in our Patent Myth Video Series, which explains FRAND licensing and debunks the common misconception that owners of standard-essential patents (SEPs) price-gouge their licensees.

Watch Now: “Patent Myth Video Series: FRAND Licensing Rates”

• On March 11, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen issued a statement applauding the nomination of John Squires as USPTO Director and underscoring how his extensive experience in IP law equips him to strengthen U.S. innovation policy.
  • C4IP’s statement was featured in an IPWatchdog article reporting on Squires’ nomination and the positive reactions it elicited throughout the IP community.
  • C4IP’s statement and additional insight from C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos were featured in Law360’s coverage of the nomination.
• On March 11, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen submitted public comments to the National Science Foundation expressing C4IP’s strong support for the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) as a way to advance U.S. leadership in AI.
  • C4IP’s comments were covered extensively in a Law360 article detailing how PERA would increase patent eligibility for AI inventions.
  • The comments were also featured in a news roundup in IPWatchdog.
• On March 10, C4IP Chief Policy Officer and Counsel Jamie Simpson’s recent opinion essay in the Engage Reader on how the PREVAIL Act, RESTORE Patent Rights Act, and IDEA Act would help protect independent and women inventors was featured again as an Engage Reader blog post.
• On March 4, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen sent a letter to the Senate Finance Subcommittee on International Trade, Customs, and Global Competitiveness urging careful congressional oversight of the U.S. Trade Representative’s upcoming Special 301 Report, which will highlight foreign policies that violate IP rights.
• ICYMI: C4IP is now on Bluesky! Follow @council4ip.bsky.social for the latest updates, insights, and discussions on intellectual property and innovation.

Government Rundown

USPTO Event: Women’s Entrepreneurship Symposium: Necessity-driven Innovation:
On March 27, the USPTO held a virtual symposium in honor of Women’s History Month, which recognized women innovators whose inventions helped fill a need in the market. The event included remarks from Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart and a panel discussion featuring four women founders of innovative businesses. (USPTO, 3/27)

Nomination of John Squires as Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office:
On March 10, John Squires, an attorney with extensive private-sector experience in intellectual property law, was nominated to serve as USPTO Director and Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property under Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. C4IP issued a statement applauding Squires’ nomination and underlining how his prior experience makes him a uniquely qualified candidate to advance key reforms supporting IP. (Commerce Department, 3/10)

Senate Small Business & Entrepreneurship Committee Hearing: Golden Age of American Innovation: Reforming SBIR-STTR for the 21st Century:
On March 5, the Senate Committee on Small Business & Entrepreneurship held a hearing to discuss how the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs should be reformed to promote the commercialization of early-stage research and advance American innovation. Witnesses included Austin Strawhacker of America’s Small Business Development Center Iowa, Ken Mahmud of Triton Systems, Caleb Carr of Vita Inclinata Technologies, and David Rothzeid of Shield Capital. (Senate Small Business & Entrepreneurship Committee, 3/5)

House Energy & Commerce Committee, Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Hearing: Moving the Goalposts: How NIL is Reshaping College Athletics:
On March 4, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade held a hearing on how protecting student-athletes’ rights to their name, image, and likeness (NIL) has transformed the landscape of college sports. Witnesses included administrators, coaches, and former student-athletes from the University of South Carolina, University of Illinois, Duke University, Abilene Christian University, and Clemson University. (House Energy & Commerce Committee, 3/4)

Fact Check

Critics of the U.S. patent system are increasingly targeting follow-on innovation in the biopharmaceutical sector. In an effort to weaken follow-on patents — or those issued after a product has already been introduced — they claim that these innovations are trivial, extend exclusivity unfairly, and drive up drug costs. But as a new report from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) makes clear, these narratives severely mischaracterize the nature and purpose of follow-on patents — and could result in policy decisions that harm patients and undermine innovation.

With new legislation targeting follow-on innovation now on the congressional docket, it’s crucial to separate fact from fiction. Here’s a closer look at three of the most common arguments against follow-on innovation — and why they don’t hold up to scrutiny:

Celebrating American Innovation

Inventor Spotlight

This Women’s History Month, C4IP is recognizing Mary Anderson (1866-1953), whose patented invention of the windshield wiper improved vehicle safety and paved the way for modern automotive technologies.

• Born in Greene County, Alabama, Anderson visited New York City in 1902 where she observed that trolley car drivers had to open their windows in rain or snow to see the road — exposing themselves to the elements and endangering passengers.
• Determined to solve the problem, Anderson designed a spring-loaded, rubber-bladed device controlled from inside the vehicle. In 1903, she was granted U.S. Patent No. 743,801 for her “window cleaning device” — the first functional windshield wiper.
  • Mechanical windshields became widely adopted within a decade — and by the 1920s, electric-powered wipers based on her design were introduced.
• Windshield wipers are now a standard feature in over 1.6 billion vehicles on the road worldwide. Modern wiper systems — including sensors, motors, and blades — represent a multibillion-dollar global market, reaching 9.8 billion in 2024.
  • The automotive wiper blade market alone was valued at 7.3 billion in 2023, and is projected to exceed $10 billion globally by 2033.
• Anderson’s story is a powerful reminder that seemingly small, everyday observations can spark extraordinary inventions with lasting global impact. Her legacy lives on in every vehicle on the road — and in the generations of innovators she continues to inspire.

What’s Happening in Congress

With the 119th Congress underway, Democratic and Republican lawmakers are weighing legislation to prioritize. For those following intellectual property policy, top of mind is the potential reintroduction of two significant bills from the previous Congress — alongside the recent reintroduction of the RESTORE Patent Rights Act — all of which address key patent system challenges:

• The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), which would revitalize innovation and investment in crucial high-tech sectors by reversing arbitrary, judicially created exceptions to patent eligibility.
• The Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act, which would level the legal playing field for small inventors and give them a fair chance to defend their patents from theft by larger competitors.
• The Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive (RESTORE) Patent Rights Act, which was recently reintroduced in both the House and Senate. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation would reestablish injunctive relief as the primary legal remedy for patent infringement, reaffirming innovators’ constitutional rights to the exclusive ownership of their inventions.

We will continue to track movement on these bills and provide updates on legislative developments in upcoming editions. In the interim, you can find resources on these key issues here.