solutions to modern technical challenges is essential 
for the United States to maintain leadership in the 
global economy. 
(2) Inventors, not employees or investors, are 
the source of innovation intended by the Constitu-
tion (‘‘securing to inventors’’) and the Patent Act 
(‘‘Whoever invents or discovers . . . may obtain a 
patent therefore . . . ). 
(3) Recent changes to patent laws and proce-
dures and Supreme Court decisions have adversely 
affected inventors such that the promise of article I, 
section 8 of the Constitution of ‘‘securing for limited 
times to inventors the exclusive right to their discov-
eries’’ is no longer attainable. 
(4) Inventors are denied the fundamental right 
to ‘‘exclude others’’ by the Supreme Court’s 2006 
decision in eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. 
(5) Inventors were stripped of the right to file 
suit in their own judicial district by the Supreme 
Court’s 2017 decision in TC Heartland L.L.C. v. 
Kraft Foods Group Brands L.L.C. 
(6) Issued patents fail to secure inventors their 
exclusive rights because— 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
21:54 Aug 10, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
(A) the Patent Trial and Appeal Board de-
clares 85 percent of granted patents invalid in 
postgrant reviews; 
(B) many patents are subjected to multiple 
postgrant reviews; and 
(C) most inventors cannot afford the costs 
of defending a patent challenged in a single 
postgrant review, as these costs can reach hun-
dreds of thousands of dollars. 
(7) Infringement trials can cost tens of millions 
of dollars and can take up to ten years to reach a 
final judgment after all appeals, making legal relief 
unattainable for inventors. 
(8) These obstacles have given rise to an ‘‘effi-
cient infringement’’ business model whereby large 
corporations infringe patent rights held by inventors 
without concern for any legal consequences. 
(9) Patent protection has led to patient cures, 
positive changes to the standard of living for all peo-
ple in the United States, and improvements to the 
agricultural, telecommunications, software, biotech, 
pharmaceutical, and electronics industries, among 
others. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:33 Aug 09, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
SEC. 3. INVENTOR PROTECTIONS. 
(a) INVENTOR-OWNED PATENT.—Section 100 of title 
35, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end 
the following new subsection: 
‘‘(k) The term ‘inventor-owned patent’ means a pat-
ent held entirely by the inventor of the claimed inven-
tion.’’. 
(b) INVENTOR-OWNED
PATENT
PROTECTIONS.— 
Chapter 32 of title 35, United States Code, is amended 
by adding at the end the following new section: 
‘‘SEC. 330. INVENTOR PROTECTIONS. 
‘‘(a) PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE SOLE JURIS-
DICTION.—No executive entity other than the Patent and 
Trademark Office may reexamine, review, or otherwise 
make a determination about the validity of an inventor- 
owned patent. 
‘‘(b) PROTECTION
FROM
ADMINISTRATIVE
PRO-
CEEDINGS.—The Patent and Trade Office may not reex-
amine, review, or otherwise make a determination about 
the validity of an inventor-owned patent unless voluntarily 
agreed to by the inventor. 
‘‘(c) CHOICE OF VENUE.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—An inventor may bring a 
civil action involving an inventor-owned patent in 
any district where the defendant is subject to the 
court’s personal jurisdiction or where the defendant 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:33 Aug 09, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
has committed an act of infringement, regardless of 
whether the defendant has a regular and established 
place of business in such district. 
‘‘(2) VENUE
FOR
DECLARATORY
JUDGMENT 
CLAIM.—If an inventor is a citizen or a lawful per-
manent resident of the United States, any claim for 
declaratory judgement relating to any inventor- 
owned patent the inventor owns may only be entered 
in the district where such inventor is domiciled or a 
district for which such inventor has consented to ju-
risdiction. 
‘‘(3) TRANSFER OF ACTION INVOLVING INVEN-
TOR.—If an inventor is a party to a civil action in-
volving an inventor-owned patent the inventor owns, 
the court may not transfer the action to another dis-
trict for convenience without consent of the inventor. 
‘‘(d) EXPEDITED JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS.—Unless 
voluntarily waived, an inventor asserting an inventor- 
owned patent in a civil action under section 281 shall be 
entitled to— 
‘‘(1) a trial within 12 months after service of a 
complaint, with prioritization in the court’s docket, 
if necessary; 
‘‘(2) a trial no more than 7 days in duration; 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:33 Aug 09, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
‘‘(3) a maximum of 10 discovery requests for 
each party; 
‘‘(4) pleadings limited to 100,000 words per 
party; and 
‘‘(5) such other provisions as the court deter-
mines appropriate to ensure relief is accessible to the 
inventor. 
‘‘(e) PRESUMPTION OF IRREPARABLE HARM.— 
‘‘(1) PRESUMPTION.—Upon finding infringe-
ment of an inventor-owned patent, the court shall 
presume that any infringement of such patent 
causes the inventor irreparable harm. 
‘‘(2) OVERCOMING
THE
PRESUMPTION.—The 
presumption described in paragraph (1) may be 
overcome if the infringing party shows clear and 
convincing evidence that the inventor would not be 
irreparably harmed by further infringement of the 
patent. 
‘‘(f) SIMPLIFIED DAMAGES.— 
‘‘(1) ALTERNATIVE RELIEF.—An inventor that 
asserts a claim for infringement of an inventor- 
owned patent in a civil action under section 281 may 
elect relief under this subsection in lieu of relief 
under section 284. 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:33 Aug 09, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
‘‘(2) RELIEF UNDER THIS SUBSECTION.—If a 
request for relief under this subsection is made, the 
following provisions apply: 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Upon a finding of in-
fringement, the court shall award damages 
equal to the sum of— 
‘‘(i) the greater of— 
‘‘(I) the total profits attributable 
to the infringing party’s use of the 
patented invention; or 
‘‘(II) 25 percent of the sales at-
tributable to the infringing party’s use 
of the patented invention; and 
‘‘(ii) any interest and costs as fixed by 
the court. 
‘‘(B) INFRINGEMENT FOUND WILLFUL.— 
‘‘(i) TREBLE DAMAGES AVAILABLE.— 
If the court finds the infringement to be 
willful, the court may award damages 
equal to no more than three times the 
amount of any damages found in subpara-
graph (A), but shall not include any roy-
alty payments. 
‘‘(ii) PRESUMPTION
OF
WILLFUL-
NESS.—Infringement shall be presumed 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
00:33 Aug 09, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
willful if the infringing party is an expert 
in the field of the invention. 
‘‘(C) ATTORNEYS
FEES.—If an inventor 
successfully brings a claim for infringement of 
their inventor-owned patent, the court shall 
award the inventor any amount of their attor-
neys fees that exceeds 10 percent of the amount 
of any damages the court awards to the inven-
tor.’’. 
(c) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 
The table of sections for chapter 32 of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol-
lowing: 
‘‘330. Inventor protections.’’. 
Æ 
VerDate Sep 11 2014 
21:54 Aug 10, 2018
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H6557.IH
H6557
lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS