“It is time for focus and resolve, too long ignored, to be brought to fix the patent system and make it work for all Americans.”
The Invitation
Regime change is upon on us! You two [Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy] have been identified among those who will have considerable influence on policy and procedure for various government enterprise in the coming presidential administration. Hence, I write this letter in the hope it may affect your thinking as to the patent system and its current implementation in the United States. I write on behalf of a culture that has, for 200-plus years, believed a better tomorrow is made possible by the innovation of today.
Background
The Patent Act in 1790 was the third Act of Congress, ever. It was the only piece of legislation George Washington called out publicly for its passage. The author of the Act, Thomas Jefferson, was the first “patent examiner”. The premise that Madison wrote into the Constitution was simple: incentivize those with ideas and ambition that they could own and advantage themselves from those ideas. The broad concept is that private ownership of ideas, like private ownership of anything else, results in its best use for the general good. Pretty much all advances in American technology have come from this fundamental notion.
The Problem
The patent system is currently foundered. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) takes away 3 out of 4 patents when their validity is challenged at the same agency that issued them! Legislative fixes are shallow and are, in any event, hostage to the distribution of money and favors to the responsible politicians. The courts, at the appeal level, are inept and unfocused. It is a mess, 25 years in the making, and undermines the Constitutional purpose of patents to the general disadvantage of the public.
The Solution
It can be fixed, but it requires focus and ongoing commitment to see the fixes through to results. The USPTO has the tools, via administrative discretion, to fix the problems relating to high invalidation rate of patents that have been previously examined and issued. Firstly, use every modern researching tool available to provide the best basis for examining and issuing patent applications in the first instance. Train examiners to use them! Innovators deserve no less than a thorough and reliable examination to create an eventually valid and enforceable patent. Punish copyists in a predictable manner with exclusion. Predatory stealing of another’s innovations creates less innovation, not more. Innovators innovate. If blocked one way, another is immediately sought. And, where none is possible, a license should be forthcoming on reasonable terms if in the public interest. Done.
The Harvest
To understand the scope of the innovation being created, I suggest you skim the first 100 pages of the USPTO’s Official Gazette. Each Tuesday of every week, all year long, the future is on display. These issuing patents represent our common hope and deeply held belief that private ownership and incentive can foster a better future across all technologies and business. It is time for focus and resolve, too long ignored, to be brought to fix the patent system and make it work for all Americans.
I am not the only source for ideas; I can and shall gladly introduce you to others with far greater insight and understanding than me. Just ask. We are all in this together; this is non-partisan and is for the greater benefit of all.

Join the Discussion
10 comments so far.
Pierce Mooney
February 25, 2025 10:46 pmWonderful synopsis of the reasons for our system and it’s current problems, with simply presented solutions. Mr. White taught ~80% of the current registered patent attorneys and agents to pass the Patent Bar… nobody better to learn the true state of our industry from. Please act!
jacek
December 31, 2024 10:44 amAnnon Yes you right. It was Vishal Amin Proposed as next USPTO director.
https://innovationgadfly.com/vishal-amin-and-the-uspto-a-threat-to-american-innovation/
Anyway there is no reason to believe that any of the people in question would be any help to pass any common sense law.
Haim Modiano
December 30, 2024 09:29 amIt would be helpful to know not only the fraction of contested patents that get thrown out, but also what fraction of granted patents get contested in the first place.
Walter White
December 29, 2024 05:46 pmDear John: you are an experienced patent practitioner, and you must know, that USPTO has a chronically growing backlog of unexamined patent applications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backlog_of_unexamined_patent_applications => ” USPTO examiners spend on average only 19 hours on each patent application. ” That includes 1) reading the application (which are getting longer and longer. I filed myself applications with 500+ pages of text;) 2) reading BOOK(s) about the technology- yes, some technologies are so new, so no examiner studied them in college; 3) finding prior art; 4) writing Office Action.
It is easy to say, what should be done. BUT the problem is that the USPTO does not generate enough revenue to cover its expenses, and the Congress takes away the little money, that USPTO actually earns.
How do implement your program,if the the USPTO has no money?
Pro Say
December 28, 2024 01:34 pmBravo John. You yet again get it right.
What American innovation — and therefore America itself — can ill afford is to be furthered crippled by being led by another Lee, Dudas, or Videl . . . instead of by another Iancu.
MaxDrei
December 27, 2024 05:53 pmThat 3 out of 4 patents challenged do not survive unscathed is not evidence of a system that is not functioning properly. Rather, the opposite.
I write from Europe where the post-grant opposition system knocks out many duly granted patents despite world-leading search and pre-grant ex Parte examination for patentability.
First, at least here in Europe, one refrains from filing an opposition if the chances of success are poor, lest (in trying but failing to knock out the patent) one bestows on the granted patent a higher presumption of validity. No wonder then, that so many oppositions succeed.
Second, opponents usually have at their disposal prior art not considered by the PTO prior to grant. It is a mistake to suppose that by throwing time and money at the pre-grant examination process one can put on the PTO file all the prior art relevant to validity. it is a mistake to suppose that the PTO can do a better job of examining for patentability than a commercial competitor contemplating opposition.
I would respectfully suggest that a sensible way to improve the US patent system would be to devise a better public-private enquiry into patentability, that concentrates resources on the few per cent of emerging patents that are commercially potent.
Anon
December 27, 2024 03:06 pmjacek,
You are mistaken.
steve
December 27, 2024 10:54 amyou hit the nail on the head!put the high tech crooks behind bars.
jacek
December 27, 2024 09:43 amIf I am not mistaken Mr. Vivek is the author of the 2011 AIA act. When comes to the other fellow Ellon. He publicly declared many times that patents are for the weak. I think is naive to plead to the criminals to abandon the crimes clearly bringing them abundant profits. Waste of time.
David Newman
December 27, 2024 05:54 amIncreased transparency is needed in all steps during the life of a patent in order to fulfill the Constitutional call for a marketplace of IP. For example, patent owners should be encouraged to disclose royalty rates each time their technology is licensed. By disclosing comparable rates, a technology marketplace can be established that is as easy-to-use as the MLS for residential real estate or the stock exchange and help side step the high cost of patent litigation.