On the recordMarch 2, 2011
I support Senator Feinstein's amendment to restore the grace period under current law and eliminate the so-called first-inventor-to-file provisions of the legislation. This is the No. 1 outstanding issue of concern my constituents have raised with me, particularly small and independent inventors. It is a technical and complex issue, one about which experts in patent law have strong disagreements. But I think the bill would be much better without these provisions. For shorthand, a lot of people talk about this issue as first-inventor-to-file versus 'first-to-invent.' But, in my view, this terminology just confuses the issue. My constituents are most concerned about the loss of the unconditional 1-year grace period under current law. Both a first-to-invent and a first-inventor-to-file system could have the grace period; there is no inherent inconsistency. I am not sure why the two issues have been merged. Frankly, people who talk about priority fights and interferences are completely missing the point. The concerns are all about the grace period. My constituents tell me that the current law grace period is crucial to small and independent inventors, for numerous reasons. First, it comports with the reality of the inventive process. An idea goes through many trials, errors, and iterations before it becomes a patent-worthy invention.
