Federal Trade Commission Votes to Conduct Study on Patent Assertion Entities
Client Alert | 2 min read | 09.27.13
The FTC announced on September 27 that after a unanimous vote, the Commissioners have decided to launch a study of patent assertion entities (PAEs) and their effect on innovation and competition. The agency has long indicated interest in this issue. The study, which will be conducted pursuant to Section 6(b) of the FTC Act, will allow the FTC to issue compulsory process orders to gather information from PAEs, as well as from other companies that operate in the wireless communications sector.
PAEs have lately garnered scrutiny from the Obama Administration, Congress, and private litigants, as described in more depth here. Their effect on competition and innovation is, however, difficult to measure, because details about licensing transactions are often confidential. But the Commission has the authority to collect non-public information, such as licensing agreements and cost and revenue data. As a result, the study is expected to generate a much richer set of data from which the Commission will be able to draw conclusions. According to the Commission's announcement, the study will target specific issues, including (1) the corporate structure of PAEs; (2) the type of patents held by PAEs; (3) the licensing and litigation conduct of PAEs; and (4) the operating costs and revenues of PAEs.
While the Commission has emphasized on various occasions that it has not yet drawn any conclusions about whether PAEs have a negative effect on competition and innovation, a 6(b) study has the potential to result in enforcement actions in the future. For example, the Commission's position against reverse payment settlements in the pharmaceutical industry was solidified after it conducted a 6(b) study on that subject from 2000 through 2002.
The FTC has issued a public call for comments on proposed information requests to PAEs, and it will accept such comments for 60 days, at this address. Upon expiration of the comment period, the FTC will seek clearance from the Office of Management and Budget to commence issuing compulsory process orders.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 2 min read | 11.14.25
Claim construction is a key stage of most patent litigations, where the court must decide the meaning of any disputed terms in the patent claims. Generally, claim terms are given their plain and ordinary meaning except under two circumstances: (1) when the patentee acts as its own lexicographer and sets out a definition for the term; and (2) when the patentee disavows the full scope of the term either in the specification or during prosecution. Thorner v. Sony Comput. Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. highlights that patentees can act as their own lexicographers through consistent, interchangeable usage of terms across the specification, effectively defining terms by implication.
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.14.25
Microplastics Update: Regulatory and Litigation Developments in 2025
Client Alert | 6 min read | 11.13.25
