PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 1, 2025
Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership Act or the PREVAIL Act
This bill addresses various issues relating to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), including by imposing additional requirements on administrative patent validity challenges (proceedings to review and potentially cancel issued patents) at the USPTO.
The bill modifies provisions relating to inter partes reviews (IPRs) and other administrative patent validity proceedings, including by
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
prohibiting an administrative patent judge who participated in deciding whether to institute an IPR (i.e., whether to allow the IPR to proceed based on the initial petition) from also participating in deciding the final outcome of the same IPR;
prohibiting a person (individual or entity) from petitioning for an IPR against a patent unless the person meets certain standing requirements (currently, any person may petition for an IPR);
prohibiting a person who has challenged a patent's validity in an IPR from raising the same challenges against the patent in other proceedings (e.g., district court) if the IPR has been instituted; and
raising the burden that the petitioner in an IPR must meet to invalidate a previously issued patent claim.
The bill also makes institutions of higher education (IHEs) and nonprofit entities that hold patents on behalf of IHEs eligible for reduced patent-related fees, including filing fees. (Currently, employees of IHEs are eligible for reduced fees but not the IHEs themselves.)
The bill also makes fees collected by the USPTO available for the USPTO's use without further appropriations from Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Moran, Nathaniel [R-TX-1] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Feb 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3160 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3160 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3160 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3160 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.