Sponsors (4)
The bill strengthens patent owners' control and reduces their exposure to involuntary administrative challenges, but at the cost of making it harder to weed out weak patents and likely increasing litigation costs, which could slow innovation and raise expenses for businesses and consumers.
Patent owners (including government contractors and technology firms) gain stronger control over post-grant challenges because petitioners would need the patent owner's consent before filing inter partes or post-grant review petitions, reducing the likelihood of involuntary adversarial administrative proceedings.
Technology companies and financial firms may face weaker patent-quality correction because third parties will be more restricted from challenging potentially invalid patents, which could allow low-quality patents to persist and slow innovation and market clarity.
Small businesses and technology firms could face higher dispute costs because challengers may be pushed into district-court litigation instead of administrative review, increasing litigation expenses and raising costs for businesses and consumers.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Requires a patent owner's consent before filing an inter partes review or post‑grant review petition at the USPTO.
Introduced October 24, 2025 by Marcia Carolyn Kaptur · Last progress October 24, 2025
Amends the patent statutes to require that a patent owner give consent before a third party may file an inter partes review or a post‑grant review petition at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The change inserts an explicit consent requirement into the petition-content rules for both IPR and PGR, which would bar challengers from initiating those administrative invalidity proceedings without the patent holder's approval. This is a narrow statutory change: it modifies the filing requirements for PTAB challenges and does not create new programs, funding, or deadlines.