Groups Oppose Bill To Give PTO Fee-Setting Authority
At least two groups that favor overall patent overhaul legislation said Monday that they oppose a stand-alone bill that would allow the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to set its own fees to pay for its operations, arguing the measure would not bar Congress from diverting some of those funds for other purposes.
The House is expected to take up the bill on Tuesday that would give the PTO fee-setting authority. The provision is in a broader compromise patent overhaul bill backed by the American Intellectual Property Law Association and the Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform, which is made up of such companies as DuPont, General Electric, Motorola, Texas Instruments, and 3M. The broader patent reform bill is awaiting action by the full Senate.
Both AIPLA and the coalition said in separate statements Monday that while they back the idea of allowing the PTO to set fees to adequately fund its operations and improve the time it takes to review patents, they opposes the House bill because it does not include a provision that would prohibit PTO fees from being diverted for other government programs.
"We need legislation that guarantees that the fees paid by the users of the patent system are adequate to hire and train needed examiners and to provide them with the modern information technology necessary to conduct thorough examinations and grant valid patents. Unfortunately, the [PTO measure] is not that bill. Although it authorizes the USPTO to set fees to recover its estimated costs, it contains no safeguards to prevent those fees from being diverted to support other totally unrelated government programs," the coalition said in a statement.
AIPLA President Alan J. Kasper also said that the stand-alone bill "would essentially raise the fees paid by users to the USPTO while significant monies will be diverted unless something is done." He added that his group "supports a comprehensive approach to patent reform now working its way through the Congress, and not the piecemeal approach represented by this bill."
That broader effort, however, appears to be stalled. Key House Judiciary members including Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., and ranking member Lamar Smith, R-Texas, unhappy with provisions included in a compromise Senate patent bill have been negotiating with the measure's authors, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and ranking member Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., but have yet to announce a deal.
Join the Discussion
The National Journal Group has the right (but not the obligation) to monitor the comments and to remove any materials it deems inappropriate.
Comments powered by Disqus