by JD Supra

Last week, Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) and Reps. Kevin Kiley (R-Calif.) and Scott Peters (D-Calif.) reintroduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), a bill Sens. Tillis and Coons first floated a couple of years ago.

If passed, PERA would eliminate all judicial exceptions to patent eligibility, and patent eligibility would be determined without consideration of Sections 102, 103 or 112. My key takeaway from the legislation was that Sens. Tillis and Coons were trying to walk the line of bringing clarity to patent eligibility while incorporating at least some of the judicial exceptions (e.g., pure mental processes) in the legislation. Read my initial take on PERA here.

Sens. Tillis and Coons and Reps. Kiley and Peters all made statements:

Tills: "Clear, reliable, and predictable patent rights are imperative to enable investments in the broad array of innovative technologies that are critical to the economic and global competitiveness of the United States, and to ensuring the national security of our great country."

Coons: "When American innovators know their ideas are eligible for patent protection, they take the risks that push us into the future – whether that's the next medical test or the latest AI technology. PERA restores clarity to the law on what can be patented and what cannot – guidance that federal courts have been requesting for years and that the Supreme Court has refused to provide."

Kiley: "American innovators have been at a disadvantage in recent years because of the U.S. patent system. Convoluted Supreme Court rulings and tests on subject matter eligibility have made it increasingly difficult for inventors to receive patents, leading to foreign companies overtaking our own."

Peters: "For more than two centuries, a U.S. patent has guaranteed inventions will be protected from theft, helping the U.S. become the innovation capital of the world. San Diego, in particular, is the proud home of a thriving life sciences and technology ecosystem that has benefited from these protections. Over the last 15 years, however, several Supreme Court decisions have created confusion about what exactly is eligible for a patent. Innovators, consumers, and even the judges who adjudicate patent law have called on Congress to provide clarity on what can be patented."

It's hard to say whether the reintroduction of PERA is a genuine attempt to affect patent eligibility law or mostly symbolic.

Read the full press release, and here is video of the PERA reintroduction event.