Chen has often supported the USPTO in important
cases, such as In re Bilksi. Nominating a patent office insider will be good
for patent system supporters but bad for those who wish to reform the system. However,
Chen sounds like he would be very well suited for the position. He earned his
B.S. in electrical engineering from UCLA, his J.D from NYU and therefore has
gained much experience in patent prosecutions for electronics and new
technology.
Hughes has recently received much media attention
because if his nomination is confirmed he will become the first openly gay
federal appeals court judge in the U.S. history. However, I am much more
interested in his background and how he may lean in important patent litigation. He received his B.A from Harvard, and earned an M.A. and J.D. from
Duke. In his practice he has focused a lot on veteran benefits, government
personnel law, international trade, and government contracts. He is definitely
more of a “wild card.”
Although these are just nominations, these
individuals may soon make decisions that could effect the big firms as well as
smaller firms and individuals. I feel like Chen, will probably end up being the
judge that protects the inventor. While, Hughes may fluctuate in his views. He
brings international perspective into the court so this could make for some
interesting news to come.
I actually think Hughes' unique background could benefit the courts in that he brings a fresh outlook to patent litigation. I'm all for for a diversified panel of judges. Cool write-up!
ReplyDeleteVery interesting read on the background of both of those nominees. Do you think they will be harsher toward patent infringement/thievery than the past judges?
ReplyDelete