Congress established the patent reexamination system in 1980. The 1980 reexamination statute was enacted with the intent reexamination of patents by the Patent and Trademark Office would achieve three principal benefits, first, to settle validity disputes more quickly and less expensively than litigation; second, to allow courts to refer patent validity questions to an agency with expertise in both the patent law and technology; and third, to reinforce investor confidence in the certainty of patent rights by affording an opportunity to review patents of doubtful validity. More than 20 years after the original enactment of the reexamination statute, the Committee on the Judiciary still endorses these goals and encourages third parties to pursue reexamination as an efficient way of settling patent disputes. Reexamination worked well until recently when it was severely limited by a Federal Court of Appeals decision. H.R. 1866 is intended to overturn the 1997 In re Portola Packaging case by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal circuit. That decision severely impairs the patent reexamination process.
Jim Sensenbrenner: “Congress established the patent reexamination system in 1980. The 1980 reexamination statute was enacted with the intent…”
On the recordSeptember 5, 2001
Source
govinfo.govEditor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of patent reexamination and the impact of a recent court decision.
Share
More from Jim Sensenbrenner
May 19, 2020
One of the few things that deans do around here, aside from using our institutional memory, is to ask unanimous consent that people who are elected in special elections from their State be permitted to take the oath of office. Today it is…
Dec 10, 2019
if you, on the other side of the aisle, believe that Joe Biden is a man who tells the truth, you ought to support this amendment
Feb 13, 2020
I appeal the decision of the Chair. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The terms of House Resolution 842 are unambiguous and so, consistent with the ruling of the Chair on September 16, 1977, to permit an appeal in this case would be tantamount to…





