United States: 2015 Patent Reform: Protecting American Talent And Entrepreneurship Act Of 2015 (S. 1137)

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ranking Member Patrick Leahy (D-VT), joined by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Chuck Schumer (D-NY), introduced the bipartisan Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship Act ("PATENT Act") on April 29, 2015.1 The third major patent reform bill introduced this year, the 55-page PATENT Act is the first reform bill to garner bipartisan support.2

The PATENT Act's main purpose is to curb the abusive patent litigation practices that plague small businesses.3 According to Senator Grassley, these "frivolous lawsuits cost [small businesses] millions of dollars and force them to settle despite having a strong defense. The meaningful reforms in our bipartisan bill are needed to ensure that the innovation and entrepreneurship our patent system was designed to protect isn't undermined."4

During the recent Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on the bill, several witnesses supported the bill but also urged reform to inter partes review ("IPR") and post-grant review ("PGR") proceedings to make it more difficult to invalidate patents.5 However, other witnesses representing the telecommunications industry opposed those changes and stressed the value of IPR and PGR proceedings for ensuring fair challenges to invalid patents.6 In response to these comments, Senator Grassley explained that he is "committed to looking at these concerns, determining whether they are valid or not, and working with colleagues to see what can be done to improve the process."7 Thus, while support exists for the bill in its current form, amendments are possible as the legislation moves forward.

The section below discusses the likely implications of four key provisions of the PATENT Act designed to discourage abusive patent litigation.

Key Provisions of the Patent Act

Heightened Pleading Standards. Unlike the Innovation Act (H.R. 9) and the STRONG Patents Act (S. 637) introduced earlier this year, the PATENT Act introduces heightened pleading standards for all civil actions in which a party alleges infringement (in a complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim), except in Hatch-Waxman and biosimilar litigation under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2).8

The bill eliminates Form 18, "Complaint for Patent Infringement," from the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (generally requiring identification of the asserted patent and a general description of the accused product) and requires a party alleging infringement to include the following specific information in its pleadings, if known: (i) each patent and claim allegedly infringed; (ii) the accused process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter (the accused instrumentality); (iii) the name or model number of each accused instrumentality; (iv) description of the elements of each allegedly infringed claim, as well as how the accused instrumentality infringes each element; and, (v) in cases of indirect infringement, a description of the acts that are alleged to contribute to or induce infringement.9 The bill allows claimants to file pleadings without this required information if such information is not "accessible," as long as a party provides general descriptions of the required information and states why the information is not accessible.10

The bill, if enacted, would impose heightened pleading requirements for all patent owners trying to enforce their patent rights, not just nonpracticing entities. The pleading rules introduced by the bill go beyond the requirements defined by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007), and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009). These heightened requirements thus might be inconsistent with the Supreme Court's general approach that patent law should conform to the same general rules controlling other types of federal civil litigation.11 Some of the proposed changes are also already contemplated by the Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference in its recently published proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which contains specific proposed changes for patent litigation procedures.12 Additionally, many district courts that handle the majority of patent cases have adopted local rules that require filing of patent infringement contentions early in the litigation, along with disclosure of the theories of liability upon which the parties intend to rely.13 Thus, the pleading provisions of the bill, if enacted, might have less practical effect than intended.

Attorneys' Fees. The bill also attempts to codify the "sense of Congress" that in patent cases, nonprevailing parties should pay reasonable attorneys' fees if their litigation position or conduct is not "objectively reasonable."14 Upon motion by the prevailing party, if the court finds that the conduct or position of the nonprevailing party was not objectively reasonable, the court shall award reasonable attorneys' fees to the prevailing party—with an exception for special circumstances that would make an award unjust.15 Additionally, the bill requires each plaintiff to identify interested parties in the litigation, certify to the court that it has sufficient funds to satisfy any award of reasonable attorneys' fees, and demonstrate that its primary business is not the assertion and enforcement of patents or resulting licensing.16 A plaintiff filing such a certification must first notify the interested parties, who may be held accountable for the fee award unless they renounce their interest.17 The bill permits courts to exempt institutions of higher education and nonprofit technology transfer organizations (and others, in the interest of justice) from being charged with the fee award.18

These fee-shifting provisions might have consequences that extend beyond just preventing abusive patent litigation. For example, the Supreme Court recently lowered the threshold for awarding attorneys' fees, announcing that (i) the statutory "exceptional case" determination should be based on "the substantive strength of the party's litigating position" or "the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated" (rather than requiring the case to be subjectively baseless and brought in subjective bad faith), and (ii) district courts should determine in their discretion whether a case is exceptional under a preponderance of the evidence standard (rather than requiring clear and convincing evidence).19 The bill would alter this standard by requiring courts to conduct an "objectively reasonable" inquiry in every patent case. These provisions might have a chilling effect on patent litigation, deterring patent owners from bringing legitimate suits and deterring counsel who might have contingency fee arrangements with their clients. Thus, in its current form, the bill might have unintended consequences for patent enforcement across the board, not just for nonpracticing entities.

Discovery in Patent Litigation. The bill tackles the issue of disproportionate discovery burden in patent disputes by requiring a court to stay discovery pending resolution of motions to dismiss, transfer venue, and sever accused infringers.20 However, courts have discretion to allow limited discovery necessary to resolve these motions or a motion for a preliminary injunction, or if it finds that additional discovery is necessary to preserve evidence or prevent prejudice.21 Notably, parties can consent to be excluded from these discovery limitations.22

The bill also requires the Judicial Conference of the United States to develop rules regarding the extent to which each party is entitled to receive "core" or "non-core" documentary evidence, as well as the extent of and limitations to discovery of electronic communications.23 Thus, instead of introducing changes to reduce the burdens of document production that often plague defendants, the bill directs the Judicial Conference to address the issue.

IPR and PGR Proceedings. The bill introduces minimal changes to IPR and PGR proceedings.24 For example, restrictions barring PGR petitioners from later asserting in a civil action that a claim is invalid on any ground that the petitioner "reasonably could have raised" during a PGR are eliminated.25 However, unlike the Innovation Act (H.R. 9) introduced earlier this year, the Senate bill does not change the standards for claim construction in IPR and PGR proceedings from the "broadest reasonable interpretation" to the narrower "customary meaning" standard that is applied by district courts.26 Further, the bill does not impose the clear and convincing evidentiary standard or the presumptions of validity for granted patents on petitioners in IPR and PGR proceedings.27 

The  accompanying chart summarizes the bill's key provisions and compares them to the Innovation Act (H.R. 9) introduced earlier in the 114th Congress.28


1.See Press Release, Senator Chuck Grassley, "Senators Aim to End Patent Abuses that Cost U.S. Economy Billions of Dollars Every Year" (Feb. 5, 2015).

2.For a summary of the previous bills, see Nix & Thurlow, " 2015 Patent Reform Innovation Act (H.R. 9) and STRONG Patents Act (S. 632)."

3.See Grassley Press Release, supra note 1.


5."The PATENT Act: Hearings on S. 1137 Before the Comm. on the Judiciary," 114th Cong. (May 7, 2015).



8.S. 1137, 114th Cong. (2015).

9.Id., pp. 2-4.

10.Id.,p. 5.

11.See, e.g., Teva Pharms. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., 135 S. Ct. 831, 833 (2015) ("Even if exceptions to the Rule [52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] were permissible, we cannot find any convincing ground for creating an exception to that Rule here [for patent cases]."); see also, eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C., 547 U.S. 388, 394 (2006) ("We hold only that the decision whether to grant or deny injunctive relief rests within the equitable discretion of the district courts, and that such discretion must be exercised consistent with traditional principles of equity, in patent disputes no less than in other cases governed by such standards."); Nix & Castanias, " Key Patent Law Decisions of 2014."

12.See Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Judicial Conference, "Preliminary Draft of the Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Appellate, Bankruptcy, Civil, and Criminal Procedure," (Aug. 2014).

13.See, e.g., N.D. Ohio L.P.R. §§ 1.1-6.2; S.D. Cal. Patent L.R. §§ 1.1-4.5.

14.Id., p. 24.

15.Id., pp. 24-25.

16.Id., pp. 25-27.

17.Id., p. 27.

18.Id. p. 29.

19.Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1749, 1755-58 (2014); 35 U.S.C. § 285.

20.Id., pp. 16-17.

21.Id.,p. 17.

22.Id., p. 18.

23.Id., pp. 19-20.

24.See generally, S. 1137, 114th Cong. (2015).

25.Id., p. 50.

26.H.R. 9, 114th Cong. (2015), pp. 49-50.

27.See generally, S. 1137, 114th Cong. (2015).

28.For a comparison chart of H.R. 9 and S. 632, see Nix & Thurlow, " 2015 Patent Reform Innovation Act (H.R. 9) and STRONG Patents Act (S. 632)."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions