On the recordJune 23, 2011
I find myself in reluctant opposition to my colleague from Texas in support of the Sensenbrenner amendment. Section 3 shifts our patent system from the unique first-to-invent system to a first-to-file system. As I speak to inventors, startups, venture capitalists and angel investors in California, I'm convinced that the proposed transition to first-to-file would be harmful to innovation and burdensome to the most dynamic and innovative sector of our economy. With the shift to first-to-file, the rush to the Patent Office will lead to new costs for small businesses as they prepare applications for inventions that they may ultimately find impractical. For small startups, the cost of retaining outside counsel for this purpose will be a drain on their limited resources and mean less money for hiring and the actual act of innovation. Supporters of first-to-file argue inventors can turn to provisional applications to protect their patent rights. But from talking to small inventors, I have learned that good provisional applications require substantial legal fees and time investment on the part of the inventor to make them sufficiently detailed to be of use. The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
