"The House is scheduled to vote on a proposal next week to require patent owners to provide more information in lawsuits, make the loser pay the winner’s legal fees, and alter rules that might make it cheaper to defend against infringement claims."

"Silicon Valley companies don’t want any changes that would undermine the procedures, which work more quickly than courts and result in a high rate of invalidity rulings."

Like an IPR review litmus test to see if a civil case is warranted?

Can't imagine why the census is up on filing suits?

This chatter has been around for a while.

Thing about an IPR...I'm all for it as an investor, if it's preformed prior to any civil case being filed. As in, let the PTO clean up its own created problems. However an IPR review that takes place subsequent a civil procedure filing (as in our case) I'm totally against that.

For some reason Congress always legislates law to benefit a few. Putting the cart before the horse (as in allowing an IPR after a civil case has started) is done on purpose.

doni