The U.S. District Court, District of Kansas has proposed the adoption of rules that create an extremely plaintiff-friendly, patent troll-friendly environment, by instituting very quick response times at every step of the judicial process.  By filling out this petition, you can sign on to the letter below and encourage the court to adopt rules that create a level playing field for startups facing attack from patent trolls.

Here's the full letter: 

We commend the U.S. District Court for their efforts to establish clear and fair procedures and create a process for handling patent cases. As a non-profit organization dedicated to serving and informing entrepreneurs in the Kansas City metro area, we believe that consistency in the way patent disputes are handled benefits all parties.

Despite good intentions, we believe that the timelines set forth throughout this process would lead to an extremely plaintiff-friendly environment. Our fear is that in the case of patent litigation by non-practicing entities, high-growth, innovation-led companies in the area, which are already smaller and less well-resourced will be negatively impacted by the proposed timelines. It is essential that these cases are decided on the merits of the arguments at hand, and that those arguments are not unduly restricted by a lack of resources and notice.

We ask that the proposed rules be amended to ensure a fair playing field and an equal chance for respondents to prepare throughout the process, during which they are already at a severe disadvantage. Compounding an inequity of resources with a plaintiff-friendly timeline, and may serve to create a less fair, less equal playing field.

We recommend that that timelines set forth in sections 3.1, 3.3, 3.6, 4.1(a), 4.4, 4.5(a) and 4.5 (b) are doubled to ensure that all parties have adequate time to prepare. We feel that by doubling the timeline in the above referenced sections, defendants will be given adequate time to prepare at each step in the process while still providing for efficient use of judiciary resources. Provided significant changes are made to the timeline, we believe that the rules could serve as a model for other communities who seek to establish fair and just process around patent litigation could look to as an example.

Finally, some claims have been made to the public that establishing this plaintiff-friendly environment would attract “patent troll” litigation to Kansas City and force startups from around the country to come here to defend themselves, creating a forced tourism industry like that of Eastern Texas. To this argument, we offer two points: 1) that it is not the role of the judiciary to create economic development policy, and that instead the responsibility for those decisions ought to be left to local government, state legislatures and Congress; and 2) that greater Kansas City’s leaders have expressed a clear intention to ensure our city becomes the “Most Entrepreneurial City in America,” and that we have already chosen to support a vibrant entrepreneurial community as our economic development strategy. Patent trolls have no place in a vibrant entrepreneurial environment, and to establish the region as a patent troll litigation destination would effectively reverse and overrule that community development strategy. That is certainly not a role that the court should take in this situation.

To ensure that our regional intent to support entrepreneurs and the judiciary’s purpose to decide cases based on the merits of their arguments is preserved, we highly recommend that the above edits are made to the proposed local patent rules.