Ronald Mann at SCOTUSblog has oral argument analysis of
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee at
Justices struggle to read “tea leaves” in Congress’s slipshod drafting
of Patent Act provisions for inter partes review.
Is a statutory reading conforming to considerations raised by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer in a quote of Breyer by Mann going to be the decision in this case? See here.
Based upon our many postings over the last 10 years criticizing the vast over-reaching of patent claims and the massive over-issuance of patents per se in our technological era, we would of course favor a statutory interpretation that permits as much invalidation of past patents as possible AND that ALSO results in a strong reduction in the number of new patents to be issued in the future: i.e. a "results-oriented" decision, both retroactively as well as prospectively, might be one way to look at Congressional intention.
One could indeed argue that "who", as a practical matter, whether courts or quasi-courts, does the above -- seriously necessary -- "patent reform" implementation, may not be as important, as that it be done.
Is the current process therefore "chilling"? It appears to us that legitimate inventors of legitimate inventions will continue to apply for patents for their discoveries, regardless of the now challenged inter pares patent review.