Eyeworld

36 | SUPPLEMENT TO EYEWORLD A pinnacle success of the ASCRS Government Relations department, according to Ms. McCann, began with a lawsuit for a patent on a cataract surgical incision independent of a medical device. Samuel Pallin, MD, an ASCRS member from Arizo- na, was suing Jack Singer, MD, an ASCRS member from Vermont. Dr. Pallin obtained a patent on an incision he claimed he developed for cataract surgery, independent of a device, and was attempting to collect royalties on ev- ery procedure. However, Dr. Singer and other ASCRS members argued that Dr. Pallin was not the owner of this technique and didn't have the right to sue or collect royalties on it, both of which would negatively impact physicians, their practices, and most importantly pa- tients. "I think this was one of our most valuable experiences as an organization," Mr. Karcher said. ASCRS support- ed Dr. Singer's defense. "I thought it was incredible that [someone] could take out a patent on a surgical tech- nique independent of a medical device," Mr. Karcher said. Ms. McCann initially sought help from the lobbying firm ASCRS was employing at the time, but they said it would be next to impossible to amend patent law. Undeterred, Ms. McCann went to the AMA for sup- port and was able to get the issue included in their health policy initiatives. "To me, this was a white hat issue. It's not just about the physicians and reimbursement; it's about the patients," she said. With the support of the AMA and the American College of Surgeons, ASCRS then formed the Medical Procedure Patents Coalition, reaching out to surgical specialty organizations. In ad- dition to involving medical specialty groups, the AMA, and the American College of Surgeons, Ms. McCann began to work with members of Congress to put togeth- er bipartisan legislation in the Senate and the House that would amend patent law. Legislation was introduced in the House by Representatives Greg Ganske, MD (R-IA), a plastic surgeon, and Ron Wyden (D-OR) and in the Senate by Senator Bill Frist, MD (R-TN), a thoracic sur- geon. e bills either banned medical procedure patents entirely or provided for a patent infringement liability exception for pure medical procedure patents. is was a bipartisan issue, Ms. McCann said. In a congressional briefing held by the Coalition, physi- cians talked about sharing their techniques and how doctors stand on the shoulders of other doctors; that's how innovations are passed on. Dr. Kelman, ASCRS President at that time, testified before Congress on a Hearing focused on Medical Procedure Patents and the legislation. e current law was inhibiting the free flow of information among physicians, which was to the detriment of the patient's best interest. e bipartisan legislation passed overwhelmingly on the House floor. e legislation was never brought to the Senate floor as a standalone bill. e Senate Appropriations Subcom- mittee, that had jurisdiction over the patent office and was chaired by Senator Judd Gregg (D-NH), included negotiated language which allowed for a medical pro- cedure patent unaffiliated with a device to be granted but not be enforced against physicians, healthcare pro- viders, hospitals, medical institutions, etc., in the 1997 Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act, which was signed into law. "Aer a period of a couple years, we were able to amend the patent law," Mr. Karcher said, something that hadn't been done for more than 40 years. Mr. Karcher applaud- ed the efforts of ASCRS and Ms. McCann. While other organizations joined in support, it was largely due to ASCRS that this issue was resolved, he said. ASCR S influences change in patent law 'ONE OF OUR MOST VALUABLE EXPERIENCES' " To me, this was a white hat issue. It's not just about the physicians and reimbursement; it's about the patients." —NANCEY MCCANN FOCUSING ON THE THREE PILLARS OF THE SOCIETY

• Blank Page
• Blank Page (1)