Dozens of Letters Opposing Patent Reform Sent to Senators

A slew of brand-new letters opposing patent reform were sent to members of the U.S. Senate during the past week, and the Innovation Alliance has posted them in their resource center. Is anyone aware of other letters like these?

Here is what the group has posted so far:

Letter to Senators Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker from 14 Tennessee manufacturers opposing patent reform

Letter to Senator John Cornyn from 54 Texas employers and patent holders opposing patent reform

Letter to Senators Arlen Specter and Robert P. Casey from 29 Pennsylvania manufacturers opposing patent reform

Letter to Senators Mitch McConnell and Jim Bunning from 51 Kentucky companies and universities opposing patent reform

Letter to Senators Harry Reid and John Ensign from 19 Nevada companies opposed to patent reform

Letter to Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison from 54 Texas employers and patent holders opposing patent reform

Letter to Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl from 28 Arizona employers opposing patent reform

Letter to Senator Wayne Allard from 33 Colorado companies opposing patent reform

Letter to Senators Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson from 10 Georgia employers opposing patent reform

Professor Karl Manheim of Loyola Law School Speaks to Seattle Patent Lawyers About Patent Reform Legislation

Professor Karl M. Manheim from the Loyola University Law School (LA) spoke to Seattle area patent lawyers today about pending patent reform legislation pending in both houses of Congress. Professor Manheim's talk was given at the monthly meeting of the Washington State Patent Lawyer's Association (WSPLA). Professor Manheim is the Loyola director of the Program for Law & Technology at the California Institute of Technology and Loyola Law School. The talk was very informative, covering all areas of both bills, HR 1908 and S 1145. Topics discussed included the hotly debated "first-to-file" provisions of the proposed legislation, which Professor Manheim was quick to describe as the "first inventor to file," placing emphasis on the legislation's continued requirement for filings in the name of the inventor. What was interesting to me is the fact that the original version of HR 1908 included a provision where companies could file in their own name under a representation that the inventor was under an obligation to assign. This provision was removed from HR 1908 after obvious protests from independent inventors, but according to Professor Manheim, it remains in the the Senate bill, S 1145. In fact, there appear to be many significant differences between the Senate and House versions of this legislation. Professor Manheim directed us to a chart prepared by attorneys from Foley Hoag LLP attempting to set forth, on a provision by provision basis, the differences between Senate and House patent reform legislation pending in both houses of Congress. Professor Manheim's comment on this chart was that it seemed "generally accurate," at least insofar as the legislation existed in September 2007. So far, there is no complete version of the Senate bill available and because the Senate did not establish a subcommittee on IP, discussions are being conducted within the broader Senate Judiciary Committee. Here is a link to the complete ("engrossed") version of the HR 1908 as of September 2007.