Video archive of the US Congress

House Proceeding on Feb 12th, 2007 :: 0:39:29 to 0:41:21
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:247 Duration: 0:01:52 Discussion

Previous speech: Next speech:

Howard L. Berman

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

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

Lamar S. Smith

0:39:41 to 0:39:55( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: in certain united states district courts that is intended to encourage the enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges. the need for such a program becomes apparent when one

Lamar S. Smith

0:39:55 to 0:40:08( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: considers that fewer than 1% of all cases in u.s. district courts on average are patent cases and a district court judge has a patent case proceed through trial once every seven years. these

Lamar S. Smith

0:40:08 to 0:40:22( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: cases require a disproportionate share of attention and judicial resources and the rate of reversal remains unacceptably high. the premise underlying h.r. 34 is simple. practice makes perfect

Lamar S. Smith

0:40:22 to 0:40:36( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: or at least better. judges who focus more attention on patent cases can be expected to be better prepared and make decisions that will hold up under appeal. this bill is a product of an

Lamar S. Smith

0:40:36 to 0:40:51( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: extensive oversight hearing conducted by the subcommittee on courts, internet and intellectual property in october 2005. the authors of h.r. 34, darrell issa and adam schiff introduced this moyer

Lamar S. Smith

0:40:51 to 0:41:05( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: on january 4, 2007. this legislation is identical to h.r. 5418 a bill that passed the house unanimously last september. unfortunately, the clock on the 108th congress expired before the other body

Lamar S. Smith

0:41:05 to 0:41:21( Edit History Discussion )

Lamar S. Smith: could take up this bipartisan measure. mr. speaker, h.r. 34 will require the director of the mishtive office of the courts to select five district courts to peaps in a 10-year pilot program to begin

0:41:21 to 0:41:36( Edit History Discussion )

no later than six monts after the date of enactment. the bill specifies criteria the director must employee in determining eligibility districts. it contains provisions to preserve the random assignment

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