Granted, the biggest problem with the patent system has been that the criteria for patentability has been so loose, and the recent Supreme Court rulings will certainly do more to fix that root cause than the recent patent reform bills. Hopefully going forward these new rulings will improve the quality of patents approved and upheld in court, which is by far the single most important reform needed in the long run.
I think you're misguided. The criteria for patentability has never been bad, and has actually gotten worse since the recent change to "first to file".
The problem is it's impossible for anyone to know what can or cannot be patented without spending hundreds of thousands of dollars hiring an entire team of lawyers to search through the back catalogue of patents and inventions and court precedents.
The patent office does not have enough staff to do proper research while a patent is being filed. If they did proper research, they would only be able to approve a handful of patents per year with the number of employees currently working at the PTO.
This means the patent office has no choice but to approve patents that may or may not be valid, and the only way to truly test if a patent is valid is by accusing somebody of violating a patent, and having the defendant refuse to settle out of court —choosing instead to spend two years investigating the patent trying to prove that it's invalid.
Even huge corporations like Apple and Samsung don't have deep enough pockets to defend themselves properly when a bogus patent is filed against them. They have to pick and choose two or three patents per year that they're willing to defend in court, while settling out of court for every other patent holder who demands royalties.
It simply isn't possible for a small company to defend themselves at all, their only viable option is to settle out of court which inevitably means nobody actually knows whether or not the patent is valid. After years of watching this issue closely I have never seen a small company defend themselves in court. Some have tried, but every single one gives up and settles out of court half way through the process. Some times they get lucky and the patent holder drops the charges and stops asking for royalties, but that's not the same as actually defending yourself properly and having a jury rule in your favour. Only big companies like Apple and Newegg are able to do that and they've only done it five or six times in their entire company history.
Personally I don't see how any reform could possibly fix the problem. There are certainly ways to improve the situation but I don't think anything can truly fix it. I've never seen anybody suggest a viable solution.