UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law


Prachi Agarwal

Citations to This Work

  • Dov Greenbaum JD PhD, Making Law School A Better Place: Using Hbo's Silicon Valley to Teach Intellectual Property Law and Entrepreneurship, 57 IDEA: J. Franklin Pierce for Intell. Prop 183 (2017)

  • Lauren Cohen, John M. Golden, Umit G. Gurun & Scott Duke Kominers, "Troll" Check? A Proposal for Administrative Review of Patent Litigation, 97 B.U.L. Rev. 1775 (2017)


“Patent trolls” have been a problem in the U.S. for many years, creating a storm of patent reform in all three branches of the U.S. government. The modus operandi of these companies (known as non-practicing entities “NPEs” or Patent Assertion Entities “PAEs”) is to acquire patents with no intention of practicing the invention or developing their products and with the sole purpose of licensing them aggressively or instituting lawsuits against infringers. This practice has been criticized as being anti-competitive as it curbs economic growth and technological development and stifles competition. The U.S. Congress’ first attempt to control the patent troll crisis was the passing of the America Invents Act in 2011. However, the need to address the explosion of patent litigation initiated by NPEs in America gave birth to the Innovation Act in February 2015 and the Protecting American Talent and Entrepreneurship (PATENT) Act in April 2015, both of which are currently pending. The present paper aims to study the implications of the various attempts of the United States to combat patent trolls, as dealt herein.