This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2018/03/13/iam-and-andrei-iancu/.
Posted in America, Patents at 6:17 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Some of these people enjoy a revolving doors-type career, with lobbying too in the mix
Summary: Suspicions that Iancu might destroy the integrity of the Office for the sake of the litigation ‘industry’ may be further reaffirmed by the approach towards patent maximalists from IAM, who also participated in the shaming of his predecessor, Michelle Lee, and promoted a disgraced judge (and friend of patent trolls) for her then-vacant role
THE EPO is already being destroyed by a patent maximalist called Battistelli. The USPTO dodged the bullet when years ago it decided to improve rather than worsen patent quality. Pressure groups like AIPLA aren’t happy about it [1, 2, 3]; they’re adamantly against Section 101, AIA (IPRs/PTAB) and many other things. The same goes for opportunists like Anticipat, who as recently as yesterday promoted a so-called ‘webinar’ — a euphemism for lobbying — with AIPLA in it (Patent Docs promotes similar events).
=> ↺ EPO | ↺ USPTO | 1 | 2 | 3 | Anticipat | ↺ recently as yesterday | ↺ Patent Docs promotes similar events
“Remember that IAM is giving honours to scammers who combat PTAB.”More disturbing, however, was seeing Iancu liaising with the pro-software patents and pro-trolls Richard Lloyd. He’s the worst of the IAM bunch. It is a very bad sign that a new USPTO Director already speaks with and participates in events of the patent trolls’ lobby (IAM), which habitually copy-pastes communications from lobbyist David Kappos, a former USPTO Director. IAM brags about going to visit him in the US and the headline is the typical PTAB-bashing nonsense from IAM. To quote:
=> ↺ USPTO | ↺ David Kappos | ↺ brags about going to visit him in the US
New USPTO Director Andrei Iancu has called for greater predictability in the US patent system and has admitted that there is a perception problem with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) among the IP community.
In his first interview with a specialist IP title since he took office in February, Iancu covered a wide range of topics including the need for greater guidance over patent eligible subject matter and concerns around the PTAB, but he consistently returned to the subject of predictability in a sign of what could become the defining feature of his time leading the agency.
That should provide some comfort for patent owners who have complained of the uncertainty in the system fuelled by the rise of inter partes reviews (IPRs) and a lack of clarity over Section 101 of the US patent statute.
Speaking to IAM on a crisp Friday afternoon from his top floor office at USPTO HQ in Northern Virginia, Iancu asserted that: “It is critically important to have predictable patent rights. If you have predictable patent rights then you have quality patent rights.”
Remember that IAM is giving honours to scammers who combat PTAB. IAM is far from an objective observer; it’s a front group masquerading as a publisher/media.
=> giving honours to scammers who combat PTAB
How about Patent Docs, whose patent maximalist Kevin Noonan has been slandering PTAB using talking points from scammers? How much damage do the Mohawk people want to inflict upon themselves with this patent scam of Allergan? Noonan has just penned this long post about Mohawk lawyers persisting, in spite of everyone being against it (US Senate, Federal courts, PTAB itself and a lot of pundits who rightly call this a “scam”). To quote:
=> inflict upon themselves with this patent scam of Allergan | ↺ this long post
The St. Regis Mohawk Tribe and Allergan filed a joint motion late last week before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), arguing that its Notice of Appeal divested the Board of jurisdiction over the inter partes review proceedings related to the Tribe’s patents obtained by assignment by Allergan, and thus that the Board can no longer proceed to Final Written Decision in any of these IPRs. In the alternative, the Tribe argues that the Board should suspend the IPRs under 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(a) pending Federal Circuit review, because “the issues raised in [these proceedings] are important matters of first impression not contemplated by the statutory scheme.”
PTAB hatred isn’t motivated by justice. Quite the contrary. It’s only motivated by greed and those who are behind it are typically patent trolls, aggressors, and their representatives. To think that Iancu gives them “time of day” is a little troubling; it would be better to stay as separate as possible from them. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (ba2dc).