dddd
PublishedFebruary 27, 2025

Litigation Transparency Act Reintroduced with Support from Stakeholders

In February, IP Subcommittee Chairman Darrell Issa (CA) reintroduced legislation requiring disclosure of third-party investments in federal civil litigation. The Litigation Transparency Act of 2025 would mandate that litigants disclose any third-party investment agreements within ten days of filing a lawsuit. This bill, introduced last October but not given a vote in the 118th Congress, responds to growing concerns over the expanding influence of third-party investment in patent litigation – an industry that now invests in at least 30% of all patent lawsuits. The situation is even worse in high-tech patent litigation where a number of technology companies report that more than half of litigation against them has confirmed or suspected third-party funding.

Rep. Issa’s legislation, co-sponsored by Congressmen Scott Fitzgerald (WI) and Mike Collins (GA) and supported by a range of business and advocacy groups, seeks to address longstanding concerns raised by both the U.S. Judicial Conference and the business community regarding the lack of transparency in litigation investment. As readers of Patent Progress know, third-party investors, including foreign-based wealth funds, hedge funds, and commercial investors, frequently provide financial backing for frivolous patent infringement lawsuits, which impact not only our patent system, but the integrity of our legal institutions and national security.

Enforcing disclosure of these investments is crucial to prevent outside influence from skewing legal outcomes and American courtrooms from being weaponized for ulterior motives. The true parties of interest should be known in every case in order for judges and juries to rule fairly. As Rep. Issa put it when introducing the bill, “if a third-party investor is financing a lawsuit in federal court, it should be disclosed rather than hidden from the world and left absent from the facts of a case.”

The legislation comes amid a wave of greater attention paid to third-party litigation investment, especially in patent litigation. The Government Accountability Office recently released a report which suggested that stakeholders reported “more than half of patent infringement lawsuits filed against them had confirmed or suspected third-party funding.” This followed action from the U.S. Judicial Conference, the government body which establishes policies for the federal judiciary, which formed a panel last October to look into establishing national rules for mandatory disclosure. Meanwhile, various states have proposed their own transparency requirements, demonstrating broadening national consensus about the need for reform. 

As we’ve covered before, when transparency measures are put in place, they work. In the District of Delaware, where Chief Judge Colm Connolly issued a standing order in 2022 requiring the disclosure of financing arrangements, patent suits dropped by 41% over two years, with only one new patent case backed by third-party investment filed in 2024, according to a University of Utah study. The author of the study thus concluded “that TPLF patent plaintiffs have abandoned Delaware because of Judge Connolly’s Order and subsequent enforcement of that Order.”

Congress should move quickly this time around to pass the Litigation Transparency Act – common-sense reform to bring malign investors out of the shadows and restore fairness to our legal system.

Josh Landau

Patent Counsel, CCIA

Joshua Landau is the Patent Counsel at the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), where he represents and advises the association regarding patent issues.  Mr. Landau joined CCIA from WilmerHale in 2017, where he represented clients in patent litigation, counseling, and prosecution, including trials in both district courts and before the PTAB.

Prior to his time at WilmerHale, Mr. Landau was a Legal Fellow on Senator Al Franken’s Judiciary staff, focusing on privacy and technology issues.  Mr. Landau received his J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center and his B.S.E.E. from the University of Michigan.  Before law school, he spent several years as an automotive engineer, during which time he co-invented technology leading to U.S. Patent No. 6,934,140.

Follow @PatentJosh on Twitter.

More Posts

Tuesday Markup of Litigation Funding Legislation

Although John Squires is busy destroying the PTAB—as of last week, he has now gone 0 for 34 on allowing institution of IPR petitions he reviews—the story in Congress is more positive. Tomorrow, t...

Step 1: Destroy IPR.  Step 2: ???  Step 3: Profit.

Last week, the USPTO issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) containing major changes to the institution process for inter partes review.  Combined with other changes made by the USPTO, inc...

Capable of Repetition, But Avoiding Review—USPTO New Regulation Not Reviewed By OIRA

The USPTO has put out a new NPRM, attempting to lock in place rules that were created without going through rulemaking in the prior Trump administration. While I have a lot to say about the substance...

Subscribe to Patent Progress

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.