Tweet of the Week @bgalvin137

Brian Galvin, of Galvin Patent Law, who's on Twitter @bgalvin137 and describes himself as a thinkaholic, former CTO (twice) now solo patent agent and tech/innovation strategy consultant, posted a series of tweets we think is nothing short of an innovative use of Twitter. And it's on a topic that's all the buzz among patent attorneys and law reformers. So, it's our pick for the Tweet of the Week. Here's how Brian Galvin breaks down the Patent Reform Act of 2009 on Twitter.
#PatReform2009 introduces (again) the Patent Trial and Appeal Board as replacement for BPAI
#PatReform2009 Introduces new damages section. Royalty approaches include apportionment based on value of invention to infringing product
#PatReform2009 Provides meaningful limits to willful infringement determination (this is a good thing I think)
#PatReform2009 Although much of the willfulness doctrine changes has already been made by CAFC, proposed Patent Reform bill seals the deal.
#PatReform2009 the bill contains strengthening of means for third parties to challenge patents....§301 allows anyone to introduce new art
#PatReform2009 the bill allows for post-grant opposition by any party within 12 months of issuance or reissuance of a patent.
#PatReform2009 post-grant oppositions are to be decided within one year although PTO can extend 6 months.
#PatReform2009 patentee can still enforce patent during PGO; existence PGO cannot be used as evidence against patent validity in other case
#PatReform2009 no free lunch: if you challenge via PGO and lose, can't assert invalidity in any other proceeding including civil actions
#PatReform2009 converse also true: you can't "appeal" a failed invalidity assertion in a civil case via PGO in PTO (§334)
#PatReform2009 Either party may appeal adverse ruling of PTAB in a PGO (more acronyms for patent afficionados!)
#PatReform2009 no constitutional issue (it was already fixed, but reiterated in proposed bill): Commerce Secretary must appoint PTAB judges
#PatReform2009 Preissuance submissions by third parties is allowed with some time limits and some statement of asserted relevance
#PatReform2009 Has section to limit effectiveness of manufactured venues and venue shopping by plaintiffs
#PatReform2009 introduces "micro-entities" as part of venue reform; must be small entity with fewer than 5 patent apps and <2.5x avg income
#PatReform2009 Overall, the bill could help improve patent quality, but will weaken the force of good patents as well.
#PatReform2009 PGO can be used to create FUD concerning validity of patents (even if they really are good) and reduce value/certainty
#PatReform2009 Willfulness, venue, and damages reforms will reduce effectiveness of "troll business model"
#PatReform2009 for you anti-software patent zealots: go back to bed there's nothing here for you. Quality software patents still count!
Brian Galvin has been a Patent Agent since early 2002. He has been a CTO (twice), a chief engineer of a nuclear ship, and has degrees in Biochemistry and Physics. Mr. Galvin is the inventor on several issued US patents, and on about two dozen pending patents. More information on Mr. Galvin's background and his thoughts on software patents, in particular, is available here on his website/blog.
For more discussion of the Patent Reform Act of 2009 by patent law bloggers, we're reading:
Anticipate This!: Patent Reform Act of 2009
Patently-O: Patent Reform Act of 2009
Patent Docs: Senate and House Introduce New Patent Reform Legislation
Patent Baristas: And They’re Off: Patent Reform Act of 2009 Unleashed
Patent Baristas: Patent Reform 2009: Reactionary Causes



Thanks very much! It just seemed like a good idea at the time...