HR 3309 - Innovation Act - Key Vote
National Key Votes
- HR 3309 - Innovation Act
- H Amdt 524 - Limits Covered Customers to Businesses With Less Than $25 Million in Revenue
- H Amdt 521 - Authorizes Judicial Discretion in Awarding Legal Fees in Patent Lawsuits
Legislation - Referred to Committee (Senate) - Dec. 9, 2013
Legislation - Bill Passed (House) (325-91) - Dec. 5, 2013(Key vote)
Title: Innovation Act
Vote to pass a bill that amends the legal procedures regarding patent lawsuits.
- Requires a party alleging patent infringement to include certain information in the initial complaint, counterclaim, or cross-claim, including, but not limited to the following (Sec. 3):
- An identification of each patent allegedly infringed;
- An identification of each claim within each patent allegedly infringed;
- An identification of each process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter that allegedly is infringing upon the patent claim; and
- A “clear and concise” description of the party alleging infringement.
- Specifies that if the court determines a ruling is required to construct the terms used in the patent claim asserted in the complaint, evidence and information must be limited to the details necessary for the court to determine the meaning of the terms used in the patent claim (Sec. 3).
- Requires a court to award “reasonable” fees and other expenses to the winning party in a civil action related to patents to cover costs incurred, unless the court finds the conduct of the non-prevailing party to be reasonably justified (Sec. 3).
- Requires a party alleging patent infringement to disclose certain information to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, the court, and each adverse party in the lawsuit, including, but not limited to the following (Sec. 4):
- The assignee that is the entity that holds the property right to the patent at issue;
- Any entity, other than the plaintiff, that is known to have a financial interest with the patent at issue; and
- The “ultimate parent entity” of the assignee or a financially interested entity.
- Defines “ultimate parent entity” as an entity that is not controlled by any other entity, including any natural person, corporation, company, partnership, trust, foundation, union, or club (Sec. 4).
- Requires a court to grant a motion to stay at least a portion of the action against a “covered customer” related to patent infringement involving a “covered product” if the following requirements are met (Sec. 5):
- The “covered manufacturer” and the covered customer both agree to the stay;
- The covered manufacturer is a party to the action or to a separate action involving the same patent or patents regarding the same covered product;
- The covered customer agrees to be bound by any issues in common with the covered manufacturer; and
- The motion is filed not later than the later of the 120th day after the first pleading occurs or the date on which the first scheduling order in the case is entered.
- Defines “covered customer” as a party accused of infringing a patent or patents in dispute based on a covered product or process (Sec. 5).
- Defines “covered manufacturer” as a person that manufactures or supplies, or causes the manufacture or supply of, a covered product or process or a relevant part thereof (Sec. 5).
- Defines “covered product” as a product, process, system, service, component, material or apparatus that is alleged to infringe the patent in dispute or implements a process allege to infringe the patent in dispute (Sec. 5).
Legislation - Introduced (House) - Oct. 23, 2013
Title: Innovation Act
- Spencer T. Bachus (AL - R)
- Steven J. 'Steve' Chabot (OH - R)
- Jason Chaffetz (UT - R)
- John Howard Coble (NC - R)
- Peter A. DeFazio (OR - D)
- Anna G. Eshoo (CA - D)
- Blake R. Farenthold (TX - R)
- George Holding (NC - R)
- Michael M. 'Mike' Honda (CA - D)
- Jared William Huffman (CA - D)
- Bill Johnson (OH - R)
- Richard Ray 'Rick' Larsen (WA - D)
- Zoe Lofgren (CA - D)
- Thomas A. 'Tom' Marino (PA - R)
- Betty McCollum (MN - D)
- Lamar S. Smith (TX - R)