What We Stand For

What Matters to Us?

Patents matter to us – We are inventing and manufacturing companies in all industry sectors. We invest tens of billions of dollars annually in research and development activities. We create American jobs through research that creates innovative products. We make innovations available to U.S. consumers that improve and enhance their lives.

Patent quality matters to us – We depend upon a patent system that issues valid patents. We depend upon the ability to effectively enforce our patents when faced with competitors who have copied our patented innovations and use them in products they intend to sell.

What Do We Support?

Support of the NAS Report

In 2004, the National Academy of Science published a 171-page study, entitled A Patent System for the 21st Century,

We believe the NAS's comprehensive study provides an excellent starting point for the specifics of patent reform legislation. Click for more on the NAS Report.
"First-Inventor-to-File” Principle – We need a more objective patent law – one where the validity of a patent depends on information readily accessible to the public, rather than secret knowledge. We want a system more closely harmonized with the “best practices” used in the rest of the world.

Repealing the Best Mode Requirement – We need a patent law built upon objective requirements
for determining the validity of patents. We support the repeal of the highly subjective requirement for inventors to disclose what they themselves contemplate, at the time of filing their patent applications, to be their “best mode” for carrying out their inventions. Since inventors already must provide a full and exact description of how to make and use their inventions, this requirement does not add value for the public, but rather adds cost and unpredictability to patent lawsuits.

Eliminating Unenforceability Defense on the Basis of “Inequitable Conduct” Allegations – To improve overall patent quality of – and timeliness in completing – the examination of patent applications, we support facilitating more meaningful communications with patent examiners by ending the unenforceability defense based upon “inequitable conduct.”

Creating a Unitary Post-Issuance Review Proceeding – To test questionable patents after they issue, we support a single proceeding in the USPTO where the public can challenge the grant of a patent on any ground for invalidity, but with incentives that encourage the public to promptly bring such challenges and with protections for inventors against harassment.

Submitting Prior Art to Patent Examiners – To improve overall patent quality, we support creating an effective avenue for the public to bring information to the attention of patent examiners before a decision is made to issue a patent.

Assuring Adequate Patent Damages – We can accept legislation codifying the existing law of damages for the sake of greater consistency in damages determinations, provided that all inventors and all types of inventions remain entitled to damage awards adequate to compensate for the infringement of a patent.

Limiting Willful Infringement – To further the constitutional purpose of the patent system and to limit patent lawsuits to consideration of only objectively determined factors, we support limiting punitive damages to situations involving truly egregious conduct by infringers.

Prior User Rights – We support allowing inventors in all fields of invention who have placed their inventions into commercial use in the United States to continue that use without liability to anyone else who might later apply for and obtain a patent on such inventions.

Patents Matter. We want to strengthen America's patent system; we look forward to working with the Congress and others on this needed legislation to ensure the continued promotion of American innovation.

As part of our efforts to work with Congress, we have developed a list of key principles for reform.