IPR is key to innovation---the issue is invalid patents, not IPR.
Ryan Fitzgerald 20, J.D. Candidate 2021, University of Minnesota Law School; B.S. Mechanical Engineering 2016, University of Notre Dame, December 2020, “Standing Up to Bad Patents: Allowing Non-Infringing Direct Competitors to Satisfy the Article III Standing Requirements Appealing an Adverse Inter Partes Review Decision to the Federal Circuit”, 105, Minnesota Law Review, 961//clara
Over the past decade, Congress has come to recognize the threat invalid patents 1pose to innovation. 2These invalid patents, issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO or "Patent Office"), can stifle innovation by precluding competitors from utilizing the patented technology 3or by subjecting competitors to a looming [*962] threat of significant infringement damages. 4When the Patent Office improperly issues these invalid patents, patent owners are able to monopolize technology that should otherwise remain in the public domain. Recognizing the threat that invalid patents pose, Congress established several post-issuance proceedings, including inter partes review (IPR), to "provide a more efficient system for challenging patents that should not have issued" 5to encourage direct competitors and other third parties to file and obtain invalidity rulings on these patents. 6By obtaining an invalidity ruling on these patents, competitors can open the technology to public use, helping drive innovation.