Ohio Constitutional scholar Maurice Thompson says U.S. patent bill H.R. 1249 is unconstitutional

Please contact your Member of Congress in the U.S. House and ask the member to reject U.S. patent bill H.R. 1249, because it is unconstitutional and will hurt small American companies and American jobs. Please put your zip code into the upper right corner of this page to get contact info for your House member. Speaker Boehner’s phone numbers are: (513) 779-5400 in West Chester; (937) 339-1524 in Troy; For Rep. Jordan: Mansfield (419) 522-5757, Findlay (419) 423-3210 and Lima (419) 999-6455. More details about the unconstitutionality of H.R. 1249 is below.

  • Maurice Thompson of the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law in Ohio says that U.S. patent bill H.R. 1249 is nothing more than special interest legislation, benefiting large corporate and financial interests at the expense of small businesses and small entity inventors, that flouts the Constitution in many important respects.” See 5th paragraph page 1, read the full Thompson article America Invents Act: unconstitutional patent ‘reform’ here.
  • Phyllis Schlafly’s short recent article on the unconstitutionality of H.R. 1249 is here. A recent Phyllis Schlafly radio interview is here: Christopher Gallagher — Patent ‘Reform’ Cheats Inventors (part 1) & (part 2).
  • More information about the unconstitutionality of H.R. 1249, including including law review articles is here and here.
  • No representative of small business has been allowed to testify in over 5 years of Congressional hearings on this legislation. A Coalition that includes the National Small Business Association, IEEE (largest society of engineers in the country) the U.S. Business and Industry Council and others is the only credible group representing the interests of small American businesses and individual inventors on this issue. The Coalition letter on H.R. 1249 is at this link.  Excerpts:
    see first paragraph, first page: “…the bill contains troubling provisions pertaining to matters that are critical to small businesses. The current proposals will inflict substantial harm on our members, who need strong reliable patents to build our businesses and create jobs.”
    see 2nd paragraph of page 2: “Moreover, constitutionality of the “first to file” provision has been questioned among legal scholars; this complex constitutional legal question and its uncertainty will disrupt investment until it is decided.”
    see page 5, bottom:
    “The change in grace period has features that favor foreign and multinational firms over American start-up firms that often seek an initial foothold in U.S. domestic markets. ……. Global harmonization is not preferable to American exceptionalism. Patent property rights should be available to all innovators, large and small.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s