Lamar Smith: “I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, individuals who raise questions about the constitutionality of…”

“I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, individuals who raise questions about the constitutionality of this legislation perhaps should review the Constitution itself. The Constitution expressly grants Congress the authority to ``promote the progress of science and useful arts.'' That is precisely what this bill does. H.R. 1249 improves the patent system, ensuring the protection and promotion of intellectual property that spurs economic growth and generates jobs. The bill's inclusion of a move to a first-inventor-to-file system is absolutely consistent with the Constitution's requirement that patents be awarded to the ``inventor.'' A recent letter by professors of law from across the country--from universities including Emory, Indiana, Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, NYU, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Albany, Stanford, Chicago, Georgia, Richmond, Vanderbilt, and Washington--states that claims of unconstitutionality ``cannot be squared with well-accepted and longstanding rules of current patent law.'' And former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey has said that the provision is both ``constitutional and wise.'' In a letter to PTO Director David Kappos, General Mukasey stated that the bill's constitutionality is assured because it ``leaves unchanged the existing requirement that a patent issue only to one who `invents or discovers.' '' Also, this provision actually returns us to a system that our Founders created and used themselves.…”