Bill · H.R. 1574· House(119-HR-1574)
RESTORE Patent Rights Act of 2025
- Introduced
- 2/25/2025
- Last activity
- 2/25/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- Sponsored by
- Nathaniel Moran
- Cosponsors
- - 1 - 4
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "RESTORE Patent Rights Act of 2025," aims to amend title 35 of the United States Code. It seeks to establish a rebuttable presumption that a court should grant a permanent injunction once a final judgment of patent infringement is entered. The bill argues that this change is necessary to restore traditional patent protections. It focuses on providing patent owners with more effective tools to stop infringement.
Yes· 3 of 4
Does this make patent and copyright rules fairer?+8
By reinstating the presumption of injunctions, the bill seeks to restore the core right of inventors to control their creations.
Does this make it easier to run a small business?+7
The bill seeks to protect undercapitalized entities like startups and SMEs from predatory infringement by larger companies.
Would business owners be better off under this?+6
The bill provides stronger legal recourse for small business owners and inventors to protect their IP.
The opposite
Does this put more rules on large technology companies?-3
The bill may reduce the ability of large companies to infringe on patents, potentially impacting their current market practices.
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?-2
The shift in burden of proof may be viewed as a reduction in due process for patent defendants.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection for smaller entities: The bill suggests that creating a presumption for injunctions would help protect undercapitalized entities, such as individual inventors, institutions of higher education, startups, and small or medium-sized enterprises, from predatory acts of infringement by large, multinational companies (Section 2).
-
Restoration of patent rights: By establishing a rebuttable presumption that an injunction should be granted upon a finding of infringement, the bill seeks to ensure patent owners can enjoy the sole benefit of their invention for a limited time (Section 2 and Section 3).
-
Prevention of harm: The bill states that this measure would help prevent irreparable harm caused by multiple acts of infringement or willful infringement of a patent (Section 2).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Burden of rebuttal on defendants: Under the proposed amendment to Section 283, once a final judgment of infringement is entered, the patent owner is entitled to a rebuttable presumption that an injunction should be granted (Section 3). This places the burden on the defendant to provide reasons why an injunction should not be issued (Section 2).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Small Business Support+7Improves Economic Growth+5
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners+6
- Education And Technology
- Improves Intellectual Property Fairness+8Increases Big Tech Regulation-3
- Governance And Ideology
- Improves Due Process-2
- 10/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/26/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/25/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Madeleine DeanDemocrat · Pennsylvania
Henry JohnsonDemocrat · Georgia
Deborah RossDemocrat · North Carolina
Chip RoyRepublican · Texas
Thomas SuozziDemocrat · New York