COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY MARKUP

Thursday, June 11, 2015

AMENDMENT ROSTER

H.R. 9, the Innovation Act

1. Goodlatte (VA) Goodlatte amendment in nature of a substitute. 2. Conyers (MI)

(032) Extends USPTO fee setting authority for seven years and eliminates USPTO fee diversion.

3. Issa (CA) (030) Lofgren Forbes DelBene Farenthold Walters

Improves venue provision by closing loopholes.

4. Johnson (GA) (056)

Amendment to exempt original and joint inventors and original assignees of inventions from the heightened pleadings, discovery stay, and fee-shifting provisions

5. Issa (CA) (029) Chu (CA)

Extends CBM program 6 years.

6. Johnson (GA) (057)

Amendment adopting non-presumptive fee-shifting and clarifying that motions for fee shifting should not be based on de minimis or nonmaterial litigation positions or conduct

7. Marino (PA) (014) Franks (AZ) Jeffries (NY) Deutch (FL)

This amendment would require the Judicial Conference of the United States to do a study on discovery rules and outcomes in jurisdictions across the country to better determine if particular discovery rules and phases better expedite patent proceedings.

8. Deutch (FL) (032)

Amends the customer stay provision to ensure that it applies in cases where the covered manufacturer is a direct infringer of the patent

9. Marino (PA) (015) Deutch (FL)

This amendment would establish a one year pilot program at the USPTO to establish a searchable database for demand letters.

10. Deutch (FL) (033)

Strikes the section on discovery and replaces it with the Senate language

11. Walters (CA) (005)

The amendment would exempt any FDA approved patent involving drug or biological products from being challenged under the PTOs inter partes review process.

12. Peters (CA) (190)

Amends customer stay language to ensure that small businesses receive relief and exempts small entities from statutory pleading requirements.