IBJNews

Hoosier firms that rely on innovation pine for patent reform

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

It currently takes three years and many thousands of dollars to get a patent approved. And even then, it can require an expensive legal defense to maintain.

That’s why Indiana companies that thrive on innovation—including Eli Lilly and Co., Zimmer Inc. and Cummins Inc.—are all pulling for Congress to pass its latest version of patent reform.

The Patent Reform Act of 2010, which exists as an amendment to Senate Bill 515, is currently stuck in a Senate committee—the same committee that will first have to consider the appointment of Elena Kagan to the U.S. Supreme Court.

But with support from Republicans, Democrats and President Obama, proponents of the amended bill like their chances of passage.

“We’re down on the five-yard line. Once we get to the floor, we believe there will be wide bipartisan support,” said Bruce Artim, a federal lobbyist for Lilly.

patents factsLilly and 20 other major employers in Indiana sent letters last month to Indiana’s senators, Republican Richard Lugar and Democrat Evan Bayh, urging them to support the amended bill. Those organizations included Indiana and Purdue universities, Columbus-based Cummins, Warsaw-based Zimmer and Batesville-based Hill-Rom Holdings Inc.

“We need a patent system that is simpler, more predictable, and that actually can issue patents quickly and resolve disputes over patent rights,” said Bob Armitage, Lilly’s general counsel.

The major change in the patent-reform amendment would grant patents to whichever inventor is the first to file an application, not whichever inventor can prove to have made the invention first, as under current law.

Proving who is the first inventor sometimes leads to litigation—typically after the person issued a patent starts to make money from it.

Such uncertainty can undermine business and investment decisions, which is why all developed countries other than the United States shifted to a first-inventor-to-file system decades ago.

“The first-to-file provisions would give the larger companies a little bit more security—a little bit—in the patent process. Because it’s easy enough to verify who was the first to file,” said John Brannon, CEO of Brannon & Sowers PC, an Indianapolis law firm that specializes in intellectual property.

But small inventors might be at a disadvantage under the patent reform amendment, because they often like to examine the market potential of their invention before shelling out the $5,000 to $15,000 it can cost just to apply for a patent.

Bob Armitage Armitage

Under current law, an inventor can wait as much as one year after disclosing his or her invention before applying for a patent, and still have exclusive rights to it. The new law tries to preserve that one-year grace period for “first disclosers.”

But the way Brannon and his fellow attorney David Novak read the reform amendment, the grace period would still be trumped if another inventor had made the same invention simultaneously and got to the patent office before the first discloser.

“Smaller inventors would have one of their options taken away from them,” Novak said. For that reason, the Professional Inventors Alliance opposes the first-to-file provision.

The reform amendment also aims to beef up funding for the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, which currently has a backlog of 750,000 patents, by allowing the office (instead of Congress) to set its fees. The Patent Office wants to give larger discounts to small- and medium-size companies to make it easier for them to secure patents and allow express processing to companies willing to pay higher fees.

Also, the reform amendment would institute a streamlined review process that promises to resolve patent disputes within one year after they are granted.

Lilly’s Armitage hopes that provision helps his company avoid expensive litigation, such as the eight-year court battle with Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc., which ended in March. Massachusetts-based Ariad sued Lilly in 2002—the same day Lilly won a patent that lies behind its drugs Xigris and Evista.

“We’d have knocked seven years off that [under the reform amendment],” Armitage said.

But Brannon and Novak aren’t holding their breath that wait times will wane.

“We’ve been hearing that from the Patent Office for some time, that they’re hiring more examiners to speed up the process,” Brannon said. “But things haven’t gotten any faster.”•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Can your dog sign a marriage license or personally state that he wishes to join you in a legal union? If not then no, you cannot marry him. When you teach him to read, write, and speak a discernible language, then maybe you'll have a reasonable argument. Thanks for playing!

  2. Look no further than Mike Rowe, the former host of dirty jobs, who was also a classically trained singer.

  3. Current law states income taxes are paid to the county of residence not county of income source. The most likely scenario would be some alteration of the income tax distribution formula so money earned in Marion co. would go to Marion Co by residents of other counties would partially be distributed to Marion co. as opposed to now where the entirety is held by the resident's county.

  4. This is more same-old, same-old from a new generation of non-progressive 'progressives and fear mongers. One only needs to look at the economic havoc being experienced in California to understand the effect of drought on economies and people's lives. The same mindset in California turned a blind eye to the growth of population and water needs in California, defeating proposal after proposal to build reservoirs, improve water storage and delivery infrastructure...and the price now being paid for putting the demands of a raucous minority ahead of the needs of many. Some people never, never learn..

  5. I wonder if I can marry him too? Considering we are both males, wouldn't that be a same sex marriage as well? If they don't honor it, I'll scream discrimination just like all these people have....

ADVERTISEMENT