October was a productive month for C4IP! Here’s a roundup of all that we accomplished over the past month.
October Highlights: Spotlighting New Insights on Patent Quality
On September 30, the nonprofit, nonpartisan Sunwater Institute released a policy report, “Patent Quality in the United States: Findings and Suggestions for Policymakers.” The report reviewed the U.S. patent system, analyzing the quality of patents granted compared to those rejected. It found that valid patents are denied at over twice the rate that invalid patents are granted. Additionally, the study determined that — contrary to popular narratives — the USPTO grants invalid patents at a relatively low rate, performing favorably compared to other nations’ patent offices, and that invalidation rates do not accurately reflect overall patent quality.
The study’s insights have an important role to play in reshaping public perceptions of patent quality, as well as encouraging policymakers to focus reform efforts on rejecting fewer valid patent claims. C4IP led several activities during the month of October to educate the public about the study’s critical findings:
- C4IP published a press release celebrating the Sunwater Institute’s groundbreaking analysis and underscoring how the study’s findings should put a definitive end to misinformation about a patent quality crisis within the U.S. innovation ecosystem.
- C4IP hosted a congressional briefing to discuss the study’s insights and policy implications alongside authors and contributors Matthew Chervenak, Ani Harutyunyan, Mark Schankerman, and William Matcham.
- C4IP released an issue brief detailing the study’s three key findings: that the USPTO grants invalid patents at a low rate, that it rejects valid patents at a much higher rate, and that patent invalidation rates must not be used to draw conclusions about overall patent quality.
Read it Now: “Issue Brief: Patent Quality in the United States”
- The Sunwater Institute’s findings were highlighted by articles in Law360 and IPWatchdog.
- To read the complete policy report from the Sunwater Institute, click here.
Additional Coalition Updates
- On October 29, C4IP Chief Policy Officer and Counsel Jamie Simpson discussed the key intellectual property issues surrounding artificial intelligence during a panel at the Wilson Center’s 2024 Canada-US Legal Symposium.
- On October 29, C4IP Board Member Judge Paul Michel (ret.) addressed the current administration’s stance on patents – and the importance of patents to biopharmaceutical innovation – during a panel discussion at IPWatchdog’s Life Sciences Masters 2024 program.
- On October 23 and 24, leading IP advocates discussed how to promote venture capital investment in innovative sectors during panel discussions at the 2024 Accelerate Investor Conference held in Arlington, VA.
- On October 20, C4IP’s public comment on the USPTO’s recent guidance on patent subject matter eligibility and artificial intelligence — which discounted the revolutionary potential of AI tools and failed to address the systemic issues surrounding patent eligibility — was quoted in an IPWatchdog article detailing criticisms of the guidance.
- On October 18, C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos spoke about the impacts of current and proposed standard-essential patent (SEP) regulations on innovation during a panel discussion hosted by the George Mason University Center for Intellectual Property and Innovation Policy (C-IP2).
- On October 17, C4IP’s public comment on the USPTO’s recent AI patent eligibility guidance was quoted in a Law360 article highlighting other groups’ and companies’ calls for greater clarity on AI patenting rules.
- On October 9, C4IP Chief Policy Officer and Counsel Jamie Simpson participated in a panel discussion on the state of U.S. IP policy, including guidance for AI-assisted inventorship and PTAB reform efforts, as part of IAM Live: IP and Emerging Technology USA 2024.
- On October 4, C4IP Co-Chairs Andrei Iancu and David Kappos published an opinion essay in RealClearHealth underlining how the proposed Medication Affordability and Patent Integrity Act would cause unnecessary government waste, make intellectual property vulnerable to theft, and fail to benefit patients.
“Blurring the lines of authority around the comprehensive processes already in place at USPTO and the FDA won’t make patients better off. It’ll only jeopardize American companies’ competitive edge, squander government resources, and help foreign competitors and copycats.”
- On October 2, C4IP Co-Chair Andrei Iancu published an opinion essay in Law360 highlighting how the RESTORE Patent Rights Act would protect American businesses from Chinese patent thieves and promote U.S. economic competitiveness.
“[A]s long as major powers at home and abroad can skirt patent protections with impunity, U.S. innovation will suffer, and our rivals around the world will feel emboldened… [P]assing the RESTORE Patent Rights Act would help ensure inventors get the justice they deserve.”
- On September 27, C4IP Co-Chair David Kappos participated in a panel hosted by New York University, where he spoke out against harmful proposals to control drug prices by using march-in rights and Section 1498 to weaken patents.
- On September 26, C4IP Executive Director Frank Cullen submitted a public comment to the USPTO explaining that the implementation of an explicit exception for patent infringement in cases of experimental use may not be necessary, and urging a cautious approach should the USPTO decide to codify such an exception.