EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

09.17.17

Why the Mohawk Tribe Should Fire Its Lawyers and Dump the Patents Which Now Tarnish Its Name

Posted in America, Patents at 2:07 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

The quick buck isn’t worth the damage done to the Mohawks’ reputation

Mohawk

Summary: In order to dodge the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) with its Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs), the Mohawk tribe is being exploited — very much in direct detriment to its reputation and status

LAST week we wrote about the Mohawk people being used by vicious corporations that only need the Mohawk people because of corporate greed. We were actually very surprised that the Mohawk people had fallen for it (or rather their lawyers had plotted this). We last wrote about that six days ago.

Since then, much has been said about the subject. We certainly hope that the Mohawks will rethink the whole thing. Published by Mike Masnick on Wednesday was this article calling the whole thing a “scam” (in the headline). The Mohawk tribe ought to take this as a sign and fire the dumb (if not corruptible) lawyer/s. The tribe should then toss out these patents, thereby signaling to anyone else who thinks about such a scam that it will end up badly. To quote Masnick:

We’ve written a bunch over the past few years about the so-called Inter Partes Review (IPR) process at the US Patent Office. In short, this is a process that was implemented in the patent reform bill back in 2010 allowing people and companies to ask a special “review board” — the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) — at the Patent Office to review a patent to determine if it was valid. This was necessary because so many absolutely terrible patents were being granted, and then being used to shake down tons of companies and hold entire industries hostage. So, rather than fix the patent review process, Congress created an interesting work-around: at least make it easier for the Patent Office to go back and check to see if it got it right the first time.

Last year, part of this process was challenged at the Supreme Court and upheld as valid. However, the whole IPR is still very much under attack. There’s another big Supreme Court case on the docket right now which argues that IPR is unconstitutional (the short argument is that you can already challenge patents in court, and by taking them to an administrative board, it creates an unconstitutional taking of property without a jury). There are also some attempts at killing the IPR in Congress.

Joe Mullin, a trolls expert, hasn’t missed this news either. Several days ago he said that a “[d]rug company hands patents off to Native American tribe to avoid challenge” (PTAB). We reckon that the Mohawk tribe isn’t at fault here. It just doesn’t know it has a lawyer who exploits them and shames them in the process. Some people have rightly pointed out that this scam might have been enabled unintentionally (without the Mohawks intending to do harm). To quote Mullin:

A drug company has found a novel way to avoid challenges to some of its most prized patents: handing them off to a Native American tribe for safe-keeping.

On Friday, Allergan disclosed that it gave six patents covering its top-selling dry eye drug Restasis to the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe in Northern New York. The deal will provide the tribe with $13.75 million immediately and an annual royalty of $15 million as long as the patents are valid. The new deal was soon reported in both The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal.

Allergan made the unprecedented move because it will prevent any meaningful challenge to the company’s patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB. Challenging patents at the PTAB in a process called “inter partes review” (IPR) was authorized by the America Invents Act of 2011, and the IPR process has significantly changed the patent landscape since then. While invalidating a patent in district court typically costs millions of dollars, invalidating a patent via IPR can happen for the relative bargain of a few hundred thousand dollars.

A very detailed analysis from CCIA‘s Josh Landau was published to explain why the US legal system is disgraced when patents can enjoy immunity by having dodgy entities exploit Natives. To quote some key bits:

What do Seymour Cray’s high-performance computing research company SRC Labs and drug manufacturer Allergan have in common? Both SRC Labs and Allergan sold patents to the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, then licensed them back from the tribe, in order to use tribal sovereign immunity to prevent challenges to their patents as invalid.

[...]

Sovereign immunity is not a topic that appears on many Patent Law syllabi. But in the past year, it’s become a more pressing issue when it comes to patents. First, state universities used it to avoid challenges to their own patents. And now, sovereign immunity is being sold to completely unrelated companies.

The University of Florida Research Foundation (UFRF) is a non-profit foundation established by the University in order to “to promote, encourage and provide assistance to the research activities of the University faculty, staff and students.” As part of this, they patent inventions by UF faculty and staff, and license those inventions.

Covidien (a medical device manufacturer) had a patent license agreement with UFRF. UFRF sued Covidien, and in response Covidien defended themselves by filing inter partes reviews (IPRs) against the UFRF patents. Back in January, UFRF claimed that, as a state entity, they were immune from IPR under Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board agreed and dismissed the IPR on Eleventh Amendment grounds.

Later in the year, a similar situation occurred, this time featuring the University of Maryland and NeoChord, another medical company. Maryland had given an exclusive license to several of their patents to Harpoon Medical, which sued NeoChord. NeoChord filed an IPR on the patents, and again, the PTAB dismissed the IPR on Eleventh Amendment grounds.

There are a few other instances of Eleventh Amendment immunity claims that may come up, including one by the University of Minnesota against Ericsson.

[...]

The tribe’s FAQ on this program is interesting. I don’t know if they got the wrong impression from their lawyers, just misunderstood, or what, but they claim that by doing this, they can help “protect[] from patent trolls.”

Bluntly put, preventing patents from being IPRed does not protect anyone from patent trolls—it protects patent trolls from IPRs.

The tribe also claims that IPR is “very unfair” and allows patent trolls to void valid patents. (Patent trolls do not generally try to invalidate patents, because they usually don’t have any products to be sued on.) The tribe also claims that they’ll file to have their patents reviewed in federal court, which, again, does not happen.

If IPR is unfair, why does the Federal Circuit affirm three quarters of appealed PTAB decisions? The PTAB is getting decisions right, there’s just a lot of invalid patents out there to be challenged.

On the other side of the fence, as usual, there are PTAB-bashing blogs like Patently-O/Crouch, who uses any opportunity to undermine PTAB. Silly US immunity from PTAB (e.g. for universities) means that dodgy companies now hide behind Natives. We have already explained why universities should enjoy no such immunity. Here is what Crouch wrote about it some days ago: (the typical PTAB bashing when he’s not carrying out automated assessment of words in patents)

US Law generally holds that Indian Tribes are “Sovereign Powers” that “possess immunity from suit,” although only “to the extent that Congress has not abrogated that immunity and the tribe has not clearly waived its immunity.” Breakthrough Management Group, Inc. v. Chukchansi Gold Casino and Resort 629 F.3d 1173 (10th Cir. 2010), cert denied. As the Supreme Court wrote, “without congressional authorization,” the “Indian Nations are exempt from suit.” United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 309 U.S., at 512 (1940).

The Mohawk tribe’s lawyer is a either fooled or a fooling actor. Whatever it is, the Mohawk need to get out of this PR debacle. They are only supported by sites that favour patent trolls. The Mohawk tribe’s lawyer was apparently told that this stops patent trolls, but the very opposite will be true. It actually does the very opposite, especially if other patent holders follow the example/tactics of Allergan/the Mohawks. Here is how IAM put it:

The recent news that pharma giant Allergan and tech company SRC have licensed patents to a Native American tribe in an attempt to protect the patents from inter partes review (IPR) has once again catapulted the controversial post-issuance review process into the wider business press. With the Supreme Court due to hear Oil States, a case concerning the constitutionality of IPRs, in its next term, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is in the spotlight like never before.

Since the move by the pharma giant was announced early last week there has been an avalanche of press and blog coverage (you can read what this blog had to say here and another piece on Indian tribes and sovereign immunity, which is particularly worth reading, here). The Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe was clearly unimpressed by some of the ensuing coverage and so yesterday put out a statement in what it described as a clarification. Clearly keen to play to the patent gallery the statement ended with: “A strong patent system is in everyone’s best interest, which is why patent protection is one of our original constitutional rights.”

IAM says that the “Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is in the spotlight like never before” while it actively participates in PTAB bashing, as we shall show in our next post.

Sadly, corporate media too plays a role in misinformation. Consider this coverage from the New York Times 9 days ago. The headline in its own right is wrong. That’s not “how to protect a drug” but how to shield bogus patents from quality control (PTAB).

Here is what the Times said:

The drugmaker Allergan announced Friday that it had transferred its patents on a best-selling eye drug to the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe in upstate New York — an unusual gambit to protect the drug from a patent dispute.

Under the deal, which involves the dry-eye drug Restasis, Allergan will pay the tribe $13.75 million. In exchange, the tribe will claim sovereign immunity as grounds to dismiss a patent challenge through a unit of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The tribe will lease the patents back to Allergan, and will receive $15 million in annual royalties as long as the patents remain valid.

What kind of a scam is this and who seduced the Mohawks into this PR disaster? Whoever or whatever it is, they need to get out of it in order to (maybe, if it’s not too late) undo the damage. Media generally regards this as evidence of Mohawks being unintelligent, or even worse: mischievous and greedy.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 21/9/2018: Cockpit 178, Purism 'Dongle'

    Links for the day



  2. Criticism of Unitary Patent (UPC) Agreement Doomed the UPC and Patent Trolls' Plan -- Along With the Litigation Lobby -- for Unified 'Extortion Vector'

    The Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC) was the trolls' weapon against potentially millions of European businesses; but those businesses have woken up to the fact that it was against their interests and European member states such as Spain and Poland now oppose it while Germany halts ratification



  3. It Wasn't Judges With Weapons in Their Office, It Was Benoît Battistelli Who Brought Firearms to the European Patent Office (EPO)

    The EPO scandals deepen in light of a very major scandal which has occupied the French media for a couple of months



  4. Links 20/9/2018: 2018 Linux Audio Miniconference and Blackboard's Openwashing

    Links for the day



  5. Links 19/9/2018: Chromebooks Get More DEBs, LLVM 7.0.0 Released

    Links for the day



  6. Links 18/9/2018: Qt 5.12 Alpha , MAAS 2.5.0 Beta, PostgreSQL CoC

    Links for the day



  7. Today's European Patent Office (EPO) Works for Large, Foreign Pharmaceutical Companies in Pursuit of Patents on Nature, Life, and Essential/Basic Drugs

    The never-ending insanity which is patents on DNA/genome/genetics and all sorts of basic things that are put together like a recipe in a restaurant; patents are no longer covering actual machinery that accomplishes unique tasks in complicated ways, typically assembled from scratch by humans; some supposed 'inventions' are merely born into existence by the natural splitting of organisms or conception (e.g. pregnancy)



  8. The EPO Has Quit Pretending That It Cares About Patent Quality, All It Cares About is Quantity of Lawsuits

    A new interview with Roberta Romano-Götsch, as well as the EPO's promotion of software patents alongside CIPA (Team UPC), is an indication that the EPO has ceased caring about quality and hardly even pretends to care anymore



  9. Qualcomm's Escalating Patent Wars Have Already Caused Massive Buybacks (Loss of Reserves) and Loss of Massive Clients

    Qualcomm's multi-continental patent battles are an effort to 'shock and awe' everyone into its protection racket; but the unintended effect seems to be a move further and further away from 'Qualcomm territories'



  10. Links 17/9/2018: Torvalds Takes a Break, SQLite 3.25.0 Released

    Links for the day



  11. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Helps Prevent Frivolous Software Patent Lawsuits

    PTAB with its quality-improving inter partes reviews (IPRs) is enraging patent maximalists; but by looking to work around it or weaken it they will simply reduce the confidence associated with US patents



  12. Abstract Patents (Things One Can Do With Pen and Paper, Sometimes an Abacus) Are a Waste of Money as Courts Disregard Them

    A quick roundup of patents and lawsuits at the heart of which there's little or no substance; 35 U.S.C. § 101 renders these moot



  13. “Blockchain” Hype and “FinTech”-Like Buzzwords Usher in Software Patents Everywhere, Even Where Such Patents Are Obviously Bunk

    Not only the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) embraces the "blockchain" hype; business methods and algorithms are being granted patent 'protection' (exclusivity) which would likely be disputed by the courts (if that ever reaches the courts)



  14. Qualcomm's Patent Aggression Threatens Rationality of Patent Scope in Europe and Elsewhere

    Qualcomm's dependence on patent taxes (so-called 'royalties' associated with physical devices which it doesn't even make) highlights the dangers now known; the patent thicket has grown too "thick"



  15. Months After Oil States the Patent Maximalists Are Still Desperate to Crush PTAB in the Courts, Not Just in Congress and the Office

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs) improve patent quality and are therefore a threat to those who profit from spurious feuding and litigation; they try anything they can to turn things around



  16. IAM, Watchtroll and the EPO Still Spread the Mentality of Patent Maximalism

    The misguided idea that the objective (overall) should be to grant as many monopolies as possible (to spur a lot of litigation) isn't being challenged in echo chamber 'events', set up and sponsored by think tanks and pressure groups of the litigation 'industry'



  17. Watchtroll and Other Proponents of Patent Trolls Are Trying to Change the Law Outside the Courts in Order to Bypass Patent Justice

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101) voids almost every software patent — a reality that even the most zealous patent professionals have come to grips with and their way of tackling this ‘problem’ is legislative, albeit nowhere near successful (so far)



  18. Links 16/9/2018: Windows Plays 'Nice' Again, Elisa Music Player 0.3 Beta and Latte Dock 0.8.1

    Links for the day



  19. Slamming Courts and Judges Won't Help the Patent Maximalists; It Can Only Make Things Worse

    Acorda Therapeutics sees its stock price dropping 25% after finding out that its patent portfolio isn't solid, as affirmed by the Federal Circuitn(CAFC); the only way out of this mess is a pursuit of a vastly improved patent quality, thorough patent examination which then offers legal certainty



  20. Patent Trolls Are Still Active and Microsoft is Closely Connected to Many of Them

    A roundup of patent trolls' actions in the United States; Microsoft is connected to a notably high number of these



  21. Advancements in Automobile Technology Won't be Possible With Patent Maximalism

    Advancements in the development of vehicles are being discouraged by a thicket of patents as dumb (and likely invalid) as claims on algorithms and mere shapes



  22. Battistelli “Has Deeply Hurt the Whole Patent Profession, Examiners as Well as Agents” and Also the Image of France

    A French perspective regarding Battistelli's reign at the EPO, which has not really ended but manifests itself or 'metastasises' through colleagues of Battistelli (whom he chose) and another French President (whom he also chose)



  23. António Campinos Needs to Listen to Doctors Without Borders (MSF) et al to Salvage What's Left of Public Consent for the EPO

    Groups including Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) and Médecins du Monde (MdM) have attempted to explain to the EPO, with notoriously French-dominated leadership, that it’s a mistake to work for Gilead at the expense of the public; but António Campinos is just another patent maximalist



  24. The Max Planck Institute's Determination on UPC's (Unitary Patent) Demise is Only “Controversial” in the Eyes of Rabid Members of Team UPC

    Bristows keeps lying like Battistelli; that it calls a new paper "controversial" without providing any evidence of a controversy says a lot about Bristows LLP, both as a firm and the individuals who make up the firm (they would not be honest with their clients, either)



  25. Links 15/9/2018: Wine 3.16, Overwatch's GNU/Linux (Wine) 'Ban', New Fedora 28 Build, and Fedora 29 Beta Delay

    Links for the day



  26. Max Planck Institute Pours More Water on the Dying Unitary Patent (UPC)

    The Max Planck Institute gives another sobering reality check for Team UPC to chew on; there's still no sign of any progress whatsoever for the UPC because even Team UPC appears to have given up and moved on



  27. EPO Seals Many Death Sentences With Acceptance of EP 2604620

    Very disappointing news as EP 2604620 withstands scrutiny, assuring that a lot of poor people will not receive much-needed, life-saving treatments



  28. Links 13/9/2018: Compiz Comeback, 'Life is Strange: Before the Storm'

    Links for the day



  29. Now We Have Patents on Rooms. Yes, Rooms!

    The shallow level of what nowadays constitutes "innovation" and merits getting a patent for a couple of decades



  30. EPO Granted a Controversial European Patent (Under Battistelli) Which May Literally Kill a Lot of People

    The EPO (together with CIPA) keeps promoting software patents; patents that are being granted by the EPO literally put lives at risk and have probably already cost a lot of lives


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts