Metavid

Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding on Feb 12th, 2007 :: 0:32:05 to 0:39:29
Total video length: 1 hours 56 minutes Stream Tools: Stream Overview | Edit Time

Note: MetaVid video transcripts may contain inaccuracies, help us build a more perfect archive

Download OptionsEmbed Video

Views:657 Duration: 0:07:24 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

0:31:25 to 0:32:05( Edit History Discussion )

the speaker pro tempore: yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of

Howard L. Berman

0:32:05 to 0:32:17( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: rule 20 further proceedings on this question are postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose the gentleman from california rise? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and

Howard L. Berman

0:32:05 to 0:39:29( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Howard L. Berman

Howard L. Berman

0:32:17 to 0:32:28( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: pass the bill h.r. 34. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 34, a bill to establish a pilot program in certain united states district

Howard L. Berman

0:32:28 to 0:32:41( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: courts to encourage enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges. the speaker pro tempore: the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. berman, and the gentleman from

Howard L. Berman

0:32:41 to 0:32:49( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: texas mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. berman: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and i ask unanimous

Howard L. Berman

0:32:49 to 0:33:02( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. berman: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 34 and ask my colleagues to join me in voting to pass

Howard L. Berman

0:33:02 to 0:33:18( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: this legislation. last congress an identical bill passed unanimously through the judiciary committee and passed by voice vote on suspension on the house floor. patents are the cornerstone of

Howard L. Berman

0:33:18 to 0:33:33( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: our economy. and provide incentives for innovation. therefore, it is all the more important to continually assess the effect patent litigation has on the preservation of patent quality

Howard L. Berman

0:33:33 to 0:33:47( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: and intellectual property rights. h.r. 34 authorizes the mishtive office of the united states course -- the administrative office of the united states courts in the district courts. at minimum

Howard L. Berman

0:33:47 to 0:34:01( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: five courts spread over at least three circuits will take part. to qualify, a court must have at least 10 judges and at least three judges must request to take part in that program in each

Howard L. Berman

0:34:01 to 0:34:15( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: of the districts. the tcheef judge randomly assign -- the chief judge randomly assigns the patent cases. should that judge decline the assignment, one of the several judges who has opted to take

Howard L. Berman

0:34:15 to 0:34:35( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: part in the pilot program receives the case. h.r. 34 requires the director of the administrative office of the united states courts to report to congress the success in developing judicial

Howard L. Berman

0:34:35 to 0:34:49( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: expertise in patent law and funds to increase judges' familiarity and funding for clerks. patent law is an extremely complex body of law, intricate technologies, federal district court judges

Howard L. Berman

0:34:49 to 0:35:03( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: spend an inord nant amount of time of patent cases even though the patent cases make up 1% of the docket. the unique patent procedures and laws, the administration of the courts and their

Howard L. Berman

0:35:03 to 0:35:18( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: dockets and the sheer number of issues raised by patent litigation makes improvement of the patent adjudication system a uniquely complicated, difficult, but necessary task. the impetus behind

Howard L. Berman

0:35:18 to 0:35:32( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: this bill is the high reversal rate of district court decisions. the federal circuit court of appeals which has exclusive jurisdiction over patent appeals reverses 30% of patent claim constructions.

Howard L. Berman

0:35:32 to 0:35:44( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: critics assert the high reversal rate is due to judicial inexperience and misunderstanding of pat egypt law. the pilot program we are proposing here would address this program by increasing judicial

Howard L. Berman

0:35:44 to 0:35:57( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: familiarity with patent law and providing funds to pay additional clerks to assist with patent cases. the administrative office of the united states courts has concerned about the effects

Howard L. Berman

0:35:57 to 0:36:10( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: of the pilot program on randomness of assignments, therefore, in an amended version of the bill we address this issue by only allowing the district courts with a large enough pool of judges

Howard L. Berman

0:36:10 to 0:36:31( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: to participate in the pilot program. as a result of this change, at least three judges will take part in the program to assure a select of a certain court does not mean the selection of a

Howard L. Berman

0:36:31 to 0:36:46( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: certain judge. as the pilot program increases the expertise of the judges, it ensures that the selection of a certain district court is not ott come determine -- determinative. federal district

Howard L. Berman

0:36:46 to 0:37:03( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: court judges are becoming more proficient at the application of patent claim construction rules and while reversal rates are coming down, judicial inexperience in patent law still frequently

Howard L. Berman

0:37:03 to 0:37:18( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: gives weak, untests and presumptively valid patents the same protection previously reserved for strong patents. we can expect that the federal courts will spend more time on patent cases

Howard L. Berman

0:37:18 to 0:37:32( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: in our country. thus, we must act now to improve the timeliness and quality of their decisions. a pat egypt program combined with a study of its results serves as a valuable tool for the

Howard L. Berman

0:37:32 to 0:37:45( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: courts to become more knowledgeable about the specific laws and technology involved in patent cases. by providing extra resources we can lower the reversal rate of district court decisions and

Howard L. Berman

0:37:45 to 0:37:58( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: insure invalid patents do not receive protections. questions have arisen about why the legislation is necessary. all federal district judges should already be striving, obviously, to enhance

Howard L. Berman

0:37:58 to 0:38:17( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: their knowledge of patent law through extra classes and training this bill does not serve as a cushion for judges who shy away from patent law. h.r. 34 will assess the benefits of the channeling

Howard L. Berman

0:38:17 to 0:38:32( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: of patent cases toward judges with greater interest and expertise in patent law and determine whether it improves patent quality and exdediets the adjudication process. patent quality is a longtime

Howard L. Berman

0:38:32 to 0:38:46( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: goal of mine. i think h.r. 34 is a first step. this in no way substitutes for comprehensive overhaul of the patent system designed to ep sure that innovation is not at risk in the 21st

Howard L. Berman

0:38:46 to 0:39:04( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: century. by increasing judicial expertise h.r. 34 should improve patent quality and the litigation process. as i mentioned previously, this bill has the full support of the judiciary committee and

Howard L. Berman

0:39:04 to 0:39:16( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: many industries and trade groups, including the pharmaceutical, technology, biotech and consumer electics industries and intellectual owners and organizations. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting

Howard L. Berman

0:39:16 to 0:39:29( Edit History Discussion )

Howard L. Berman: h.r. 34. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas. mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. smith: mr. speaker, it is

Lamar S. Smith

0:39:29 to 0:39:41( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: widely recognized that patent litigation is too expensive, too time consuming and too unpredictable. h.r. 34 addresses these concerns by authorizing the establishment of a pilot program

Lamar S. Smith

0:39:29 to 0:41:21( Edit History Discussion )
Speech By: Lamar S. Smith

Personal tools

MetaVid is a non-profit project of UC Santa Cruz and the Sunlight Foundation. Learn more About MetaVid

The C-SPAN logo and other servicemarks that may be found in video content are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Metavid