32648 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 1998 / Notices

may determine whether a substantial new

question of patentability is raised by patents

and publication discovered by him . * * *’’);

see also MPEP § 2244 (‘‘If the examiner

believes that additional prior art patents and

publications can be readily obtained by

searching to supply any deficiencies in the

prior art cited in the request, the examiner

can perform such an additional search.’’).

9. See Portola Packaging, Inc., 110 F.3d at

790, 42 USPQ2d at 1299 (examiner presumed

to have done his job). There may be unusual

fact patterns and evidence which suggests

that the PTO did not consider the prior art

that was discussed in the prior PTO

proceeding. These cases should be brought to

the attention of the Group Director. For a

discussion of the treatment of such cases, see

section E above.

10. If not specified, a reexamination

generally includes all claims. However,

reexamination may be limited to specific

claims. See 35 U.S.C. 304 (authorizing the

power to grant reexamination for

determination of a ‘‘substantial new question

of patentability affecting any claim of a

patent.’’) (emphasis added). Thus, the

Commissioner may order reexamination

confined to specific claims. However,

reexamination is not necessarily limited to

those questions set forth in the reexamination

order. See 37 CFR 1.104(a) (‘‘The

examination shall be complete with respect

both to compliance of the application or

patent under reexamination with the

applicable statutes and rules and to the

patentability of the invention as claimed.

* * *’’).

11. The Commissioner may conduct a

search for new art prior to determining

whether a substantial new question of

patentability exists prior to terminating any

ongoing reexamination proceeding. See 35

U.S.C. 303. See also 35 U.S.C. 305 (indicating

that ‘‘reexamination will be conducted

according to the procedures established for

initial examination,’’ thereby suggesting that

the Commissioner may conduct a search

during an ongoing reexamination

proceeding).

12. See 62 FR 53,151, 53,191 (October 10,

1997) (to be codified at 37 CFR § 1.104(c)(2)).

13. The file history of the prior PTO

proceeding should indicate which portion of

the textbook was previously considered. See

37 CFR 1.98(a)(2)(ii) (an information

disclosure statement must include a copy of

each ‘‘publication or that portion which

caused it to be listed’’) (emphasis added).

14. However, a reexamination request that

merely provides a new interpretation of a

reference already previously expressly relied

upon or actually discussed by the PTO does

not create a substantial new question of

patentability.

15. For example, the examiner may have

not believed that the reference qualified as

prior art because: (i) the reference was

undated; (ii) the applicant submitted a

declaration believed to be sufficient to

antedate the reference under 37 CFR 1.131;

or (iii) the examiner attributed an incorrect

filing date to the claimed invention.

16. For example, the request could: (i)

verify the date of the reference; (ii)

undermine the sufficiency of the section 131

declaration; or (iii) explain the correct filing

date accorded a claim.

17. For purposes of reexamination, a

cumulative reference that is repetitive is one

that substantially reiterates verbatim the

teachings of a reference that was either

previously expressly relied upon or

discussed in a prior PTO proceeding even

though the title or the citation of the

reference may be different.

Dated: June 9, 1998.

Bruce A. Lehman,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce and

Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.

[FR Doc. 98–15778 Filed 6–12–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review;

comment request.

SUMMARY: The Acting Deputy Chief

Information Officer, Office of the Chief

Information Officer, invites comments

on the submission for OMB review as

required by the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995.

DATES: Interested persons are invited to

submit comments on or before July 15,

1998.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to the Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Attention: Danny Werfel, Desk Officer,

Department of Education, Office of

Management and Budget, 725 17th

Street, NW., Room 10235, New

Executive Office Building, Washington,

DC 20503. Requests for copies of the

proposed information collection

requests should be addressed to Patrick

J. Sherrill, Department of Education, 600

Independence Avenue, SW, Room 5624,

Regional Office Building 3, Washington,

DC 20202–4651.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrick J. Sherrill (202) 708–8196.

Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD) may call the Federal Information

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time,

Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section

3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of

1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires

that the Office of Management and

Budget (OMB) provide interested

Federal agencies and the public an early

opportunity to comment on information

collection requests. OMB may amend or

waive the requirement for public

consultation to the extent that public

participation in the approval process

would defeat the purpose of the

information collection, violate State or

Federal law, or substantially interfere

with any agency’s ability to perform its

statutory obligations. The Acting Deputy

Chief Information Officer, Office of the

Chief Information Officer, publishes this

notice containing proposed information

collection requests prior to submission

of these requests to OMB. Each

proposed information collection,

grouped by office, contains the

following: (1) Type of review requested,

e.g., new, revision, extension, existing

or reinstatement; (2) Title; (3) Summary

of the collection; (4) Description of the

need for, and proposed use of, the

information; (5) Respondents and

frequency of collection; and (6)

Reporting and/or Recordkeeping

burden. OMB invites public comment at

the address specified above. Copies of

the requests are available from Patrick J.

Sherrill at the address specified above.

Dated: June 10, 1998.

Hazel Fiers,

Acting Deputy Chief Information Officer,

Office of the Chief Information Officer.

Office of the Under Secretary

Type of Review: New.

Title: Follow-up Study of State

Implementation of Federal Elementary

and Secondary Education Programs.

Frequency: One time.

Affected Public: State, local or Tribal

Gov’t; SEAs or LEAs.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour

Burden:

Responses: 459.

Burden Hours: 459.

Abstract: The Department of

Education is charged with evaluating

Title I of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act (ESEA) and other

elementary and secondary education

legislation enacted by the 103rd

Congress. These surveys will collect

information on the operations and

effects at the state level of legislative

provisions and federal assistance, in the

context of state education reform efforts.

Findings will be used in reporting to

Congress and improving information

dissemination. Respondents are

managers in nine programs in all 50

state education agencies.

Office of the Under Secretary

Type of Review: New.

Title: 1998 Study of America Reads

Challenge: READ*WRITE*NOW!

(ARC:RWN) Summer Sites.

Frequency: On Occasion.

Affected Public: State, local or Tribal

Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs.

Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour

Burden:
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 114 / Monday, June 15, 1998 / Notices 32649

Responses: 65.

Burden Hours: 65.

Abstract: The Department of

Education will use this data collection

to generate information that describes

ARC:RWN pilot sites providing summer

and year-round community literacy

programs. The information, collected

from up to 65 project coordinators, will

be used by Department Officials to

inform ARC reauthorization and

proposed RWN legislation, and by

ARC:RWN project coordinators and

other community reading initiatives to

design new projects.

[FR Doc. 98–15848 Filed 6–12–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Office of Energy Research

Energy Research Financial Assistance

Program Notice 98–19: Human

Genome Program—Ethical, Legal, and

Social Implications

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Notice inviting grant

applications.

SUMMARY: The Office of Biological and

Environmental Research (OBER) of the

Office of Energy Research (ER), U.S.

Department of Energy (DOE), hereby

announces its interest in receiving

applications in support of the Ethical,

Legal, and Social Implications (ELSI)

subprogram of the Human Genome

Program (HGP). The HGP is a

coordinated, multidisciplinary, directed

research effort aimed at obtaining a

detailed understanding of the human

genome at the molecular level. This

particular research notice invites

research grants that address ethical,

legal, and social implications from the

use of information and knowledge

resulting from the HGP.

DATES: Potential applicants are strongly

encouraged to submit a brief

preapplication. All preapplications,

referencing Program Notice 98–19,

should be received by 4:30 p.m., E.D.T.,

July 30, 1998. Early submissions are

encouraged. A response discussing the

potential program relevance and

encouraging or discouraging a formal

application generally will be

communicated within 20 days of

receipt.

Formal applications submitted in

response to this notice must be received

by 4:30 p.m., E.D.T., September 17,

1998, to be accepted for merit review in

November and to permit timely

consideration for award in Fiscal Year

1999.

ADDRESSES: Preapplications, referencing

Program Notice 98–19, should be sent

to: Dr. Daniel W. Drell, Office of

Biological and Environmental Research,

ER–72, 19901 Germantown Road,

Germantown, MD 20874–1290.

Formal applications, referencing

Program Notice 98–19, should be

forwarded to: U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of Energy Research,

Grants and Contracts Division, ER–64,

19901 Germantown Road, Germantown,

MD 20874–1290, ATTN: Program Notice

98–19. This address also must be used

when submitting applications by U.S.

Postal Service Express Mail, or any

commercial mail delivery service, or

when hand carried by the applicant. An

original and seven copies of the

application must be submitted.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Daniel W. Drell, Office of Biological and

Environmental Research, ER–72, Office

of Energy Research, U.S. Department of

Energy, 19901 Germantown Road,

Germantown, MD 20874–1290,

telephone: (301) 903–6488 or E-mail:

daniel.drell@oer.doe.gov. The full text

of Program Notice 98–19 is available via

the Internet using the following web site

address: http://www.er.doe.gov/

production/grants/grants.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DOE

encourages the submission of

applications that will address, analyze,

or anticipate ELSI issues associated with

human genome research. The DOE

particularly encourages research in four

broad areas:

I. The uses, impacts, implications of,

and privacy of genetic information in

the workplace, particularly screening

and monitoring programs that involve

the collection and evaluation of genetic

information, and the use of the

workplace as a research venue. Research

is encouraged that would explore

historical experiences, current practices,

and lessons learned as they pertain to

the collection and use of worker genetic

information. This research can include

issues arising from the creation, use,

maintenance, privacy and disclosure of

genetic information obtained in

workplace settings that can include, but

is not limited to, workplaces at which

DOE activities are taking place or have

in the past.

II. Access to, and protection of,

genetic information particularly

information stored in computerized

databases, or obtained from stored

human tissue or sample archives.

Research is encouraged to explore

confidentiality of genetic data in

databanks and databases, the

anonymization of genetic records and

samples, and the intellectual property

protection of genetic information and

genome research tools, technologies,

and resources.

III. The preparation and

dissemination of relevant educational

materials in any appropriate medium

that will enhance understanding of the

ethical, legal, and social aspects of the

HGP among the public or specified

groups. An interest of this notice is the

education of Institutional Review

Boards (IRB) that review protocols

involving the gathering of genetic

information and genome investigators

who work with human subjects or

materials from which genetic

information can be obtained. Additional

groups of interest could include judges,

the media, policy makers, and DOE

employees and contractors.

IV. The ethical, legal, and societal

implications of advances in the

scientific understanding of complex or

multi-genic characteristics and

conditions, gene-environment

interactions that result in diseases or

disease susceptibilities, and human

polymorphisms. In particular, the DOE

is interested in studies identifying the

responses of institutions (e.g., courts,

employers, companies, schools, etc.)

that must deal with ‘‘genetic

uncertainty,’’ e.g., lack of certainty of

the results of screening for susceptibility

genes, uncertain consequences of yetundefined environmental influences,

and highly polymorphic genes whose

numerous alleles are not fully

characterized.

All applications should demonstrate

knowledge of the relevant literature, any

related completed activities, and should

include detailed plans for the gathering

and analysis of factual information and

the associated ethical, legal, and social

implications. All applications should

include, where appropriate, detailed

discussion of human subjects protection

issues, e.g., storage of, manipulation of,

and access to data. Provisions to ensure

the inclusion of women, minorities, and

potentially disabled individuals must be

described, unless specific exclusions are

scientifically necessary and justified in

detail. All proposed research

applications should address the issue of

efficient dissemination of results to the

widest appropriate audience as well as

a time line for their production and

dissemination. In the absence of

tangible products, rigorous assessments

must be included to facilitate evaluation

of progress. All applications should

include letters of agreement to

collaborate from potential collaborators;

these letters should specify the

contributions the collaborators intend to

make if the application is accepted and

funded. If an educational effort for a