Goodlatte seeks to drop expansion of CBM review from anti-troll bill

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Goodlatte seeks to drop expansion of CBM review from anti-troll bill

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte introduced an amendment to his patent reform bill yesterday that would drop his plan to expand covered business method (CBM) review to software patents

House Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte introduced an amendment to his patent reform bill yesterday that would drop his plan to expand covered business method (CBM) review to software patents.

The bill, known as the Innovation Act, was introduced by Goodlatte in October in an effort to curb patent trolls. Amongst other things, it would require more transparency from NPEs about their subsidiaries, patents and business practices.

The provision Goodlatte now wants to remove would have allowed parties accused of patent infringement to challenge the validity of the patent in question through a streamlined USPTO post-grant procedure. The process would have provided a cheaper and faster alternative to litigation for accused infringers seeking to get a patent invalidated.

At present, this procedure is only available for certain business method patents “covered” under Section 18 of the AIA via CBM review. The cost of having a pursuing invalidation under CBM review tends to be in the $100,000 to $300,000 range including the cost of attorneys and filings fees, compared to upwards of $1 million to pursue invalidation through litigation.

In addition, CBM review allows patents to be challenged as being too abstract, too broad or too vague, grounds that are not available for other post-grant procedures at the USPTO.

Goodlatte’s about-face may be the result of the efforts by lobbyists representing large corporations with a business model that depends on patents. In September, over 100 companies wrote a letter to Goodlatte and other members of the Committee on the Judiciary protesting against plans to expand CBM review.

Expanding CBM review to other types of patents has received support from some trade associations and has been suggested in other legislation designed to combat trolls, such as the Stopping the Offensive Use of Patents (STOP) Act.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Attorneys explain why there are early signs that the US Supreme Court could rule in favour of ISP Cox in a copyright dispute
A swathe of UPC-related hires suggests firms are taking the forum seriously, as questions over the transitional stage begin
A win for Nintendo in China and King & Spalding hiring a prominent patent litigator were also among the top talking points
Rebecca Newman at Addleshaw Goddard, who live-reported on the seminal dispute, unpicks the trials and tribulations of the case and considers its impact
Attorneys predict how Lululemon’s trade dress and design patent suit against Costco could play out
Lawyers at Linklaters analyse some of the key UPC trends so far, and look ahead to life beyond the transition period
David Rodrigues, who previously worked at an IP boutique, said he may become more involved in transactional work at his new firm
Indian smartphone maker Lava must pay $2.3 million as a security deposit for past sales, as its dispute with Dolby over audio coding SEPs plays out
Powell Gilbert’s opening in Düsseldorf, complete with a new partner hire, continues this summer’s trend of UPC-related lateral movement
IP leaders at Brandsmiths and Bird & Bird, who were on opposing sides at the UK Supreme Court in Iconix v Dream Pairs, unpick the landmark case and its ramifications
Gift this article