Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill amends 35 U.S.C. 271(e) to limit patent holders to asserting no more than one patent per defined “Patent Group” in infringement actions against applicants, holders, or makers of certain drugs and biological products (505(b)(2), 505(j), and 351(k)). It defines “Patent Group” by commonly owned patents linked by terminal disclaimers under 35 U.S.C. 253, bars bringing additional actions asserting other patents in the same group against the same party, and applies to applications filed on or after enactment.
Liberal emphasizes consumer access and reduced holdup; conservatives emphasize patent rights and innovation incentives.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive statutory amendment that clearly states an operative rule (limiting patent assertions to one patent per defined Patent Group in specified regulatory-litigation contexts) and integrates that rule into existing statute with an applicability date.
The bill amends 35 U.S.C. 271(e) to limit patent holders to asserting no more than one patent per defined “Patent Group” in infringement actions against applicants, holders, or makers of certain drugs and biological products (505(b)(2), 505(j), and 351(k)).
It defines “Patent Group” by commonly owned patents linked by terminal disclaimers under 35 U.S.C. 253, bars bringing additional actions asserting other patents in the same group against the same party, and applies to applications filed on or after enactment.
Technically narrow and reform-oriented but hits a sensitive industry; prospective scope helps, but strong stakeholders and Senate hurdles lower odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive statutory amendment that clearly states an operative rule (limiting patent assertions to one patent per defined Patent Group in specified regulatory-litigation contexts) and integrates that rule into existing statute with an applicability date. It provides a workable statutory mechanism but leaves several practical and boundary issues unaddressed and includes no fiscal or evaluative provisions.
Liberal emphasizes consumer access and reduced holdup; conservatives emphasize patent rights and innovation incentives.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberal emphasizes consumer access and reduced holdup; conservatives emphasize patent rights and innovation incentives.
Generally favorable; sees the bill as a targeted reform to reduce patent thickets that delay generic and biosimilar competition.
Believes it could lower drug prices and cut frivolous or duplicative litigation that manufacturers use to block market entry.
Cautiously supportive but pragmatic; views the bill as a focused fix to a documented problem (patent thickets) while recognizing legal and economic tradeoffs.
Wants clearer definitions and empirical review to avoid unintended consequences.
Likely opposed; views the bill as a statutory restriction on patent enforcement that reduces property rights and weakens incentives for pharmaceutical innovation.
Concerned about broad government interference in patent remedies.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and reform-oriented but hits a sensitive industry; prospective scope helps, but strong stakeholders and Senate hurdles lower odds.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberal emphasizes consumer access and reduced holdup; conservatives emphasize patent rights and innovation incentives.
Technically narrow and reform-oriented but hits a sensitive industry; prospective scope helps, but strong stakeholders and Senate hurdles l…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive statutory amendment that clearly states an operative rule (limiting patent assertions to one patent per defined Patent Group in spec…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.