5828 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Notices 

(https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/treaties/ 

en/docs/pdf/gratk.pdf). 

6See, e.g., Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on 

the Law of Treaties (https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/ 

instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf). 

7See WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, 

Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional 

Knowledge, Articles 12–13, 18 (https://

www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/gratk_dc/gratk_

dc_7.pdf). 

8According to WIPO, as of December 5, 2024, 

only Malawi had ratified or acceded to the Treaty. 

not make a Member State a party to (i.e., 

bound by) the Treaty. Rather, signing 

qualifies the signatory Member State to 

proceed to ratification, acceptance, or 

approval and creates an obligation for 

the Member State to refrain from acts 

that would defeat the object and 

purpose of the Treaty.6 To become a 

party to the Treaty, a Member State 

must undertake a separate step of 

ratification or accession.7

The Treaty will enter into force three 

months after it is ratified or acceded to 

by 15 Contracting Parties. 8 Thereafter, 

Treaty provisions will apply in any 

Member State of WIPO that is or 

subsequently becomes a Contracting 

Party to the Treaty. This means, for 

example, that the Treaty’s required 

disclosure of the origin/source of GRs/ 

ATK will apply to all patent applicants 

who file an application in a Contracting 

Party, including those applicants who 

come from countries that have not 

ratified or acceded to the Treaty. 

Within the U.S. Government, the 

USPTO, based on authority delegated by 

the U.S. Department of State, takes the 

lead in the WIPO IGC among other 

Federal agencies and coordinates and 

develops U.S. positions on issues before 

the WIPO IGC. 

Request for Information 

The USPTO welcomes Tribal input on 

any issues relevant to this Notice and is 

particularly interested in comments 

responsive to the questions below. The 

USPTO also has issued in this issue of 

the Federal Register a notice entitled, 

‘‘Request for Comments and Testimony 

on the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual 

Property, Genetic Resources and 

Associated Traditional Knowledge,’’ 

which is directed to the general public 

(‘‘public FRN’’). Tribes may also provide 

comments responsive to the questions 

or participate in the public hearing 

described in the USPTO’s public FRN 

regarding the Treaty. 

Questions for Comment 

When submitting written comments, 

please identify yourself and either your 

Tribal Government, or that you are a 

Native Hawaiian or other Pacific 

Islander. If you are a representative, 

please identify yourself and for whom 

you are speaking. Commenters need not 

respond to every question and may 

provide relevant information, even if 

not responsive to a particular question. 

1. In your view, should the United 

States sign and become a party to the 

WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, 

Genetic Resources and Associated 

Traditional Knowledge? In your 

response, please identify and explain 

your reasons in detail, including legal, 

policy, and any other considerations. 

2. In your view, please explain 

whether the Treaty is consistent or 

inconsistent with existing U.S. law, 

including tribal treaties and other 

federal law. In your response, please 

explain your legal reasoning and 

identify the provisions of the Treaty that 

are consistent or inconsistent with U.S. 

law. 

3. If, in your view, the Treaty is 

inconsistent with existing U.S. law, 

please identify and explain the 

change(s) to U.S. law necessary for 

compliance with the Treaty. In doing so, 

please describe any impacts of adopting 

such change(s). 

4. In your view, please explain 

whether the Treaty is consistent or 

inconsistent with existing U.S. 

international obligations, including 

treaties, free trade agreements, and other 

international agreement(s). In your 

response, please explain your legal 

reasoning and identify the provision(s) 

of the Treaty that are consistent or 

inconsistent with specific U.S. 

international obligations. 

5. Please indicate whether and, if so, 

how GRs and ATK may be protected by 

existing U.S. law(s). In doing so, please 

explain your legal reasoning and 

identify the specific law(s) by which 

GRs and ATK may be protected. 

6. Please indicate whether and, if so, 

how GRs and ATK may be protected by 

tribal treaties, tribal customary law and 

protocols, tribal codes, or in other ways. 

In doing so, please explain your legal 

reasoning and identify the specific 

provision(s) of the identified ways by 

which GRs and ATK may be protected. 

7. If the United States does not 

become a party to the Treaty, please 

identify any Treaty or other provision(s) 

you believe should be incorporated in 

U.S. patent or other law for protection 

of GRs and ATK. In your response, 

please explain the reason(s) for and any 

impact(s) of, incorporating those 

provisions in U.S. patent or other law. 

8. In your view, please identify and 

explain any impact(s) of implementing 

the Treaty on domestic and global 

innovation, including both tribal and 

non-Indigenous innovation. 

9. Based on your experiences with 

other countries that require patent 

applicants to disclose the source or 

origin of GRs or ATK, please identify 

and explain any possible impact(s) of 

Treaty implementation in the United 

States. 

10. In your view, please identify and 

explain any impact(s) of implementing 

or not implementing the Treaty on the 

Tribal Nations and other Indigenous 

Peoples located in the U.S. 

Derrick L. Brent, 

Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Intellectual Property and Acting Director of 

the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01092 Filed 1–16–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

Patent and Trademark Office 

[Docket No.: PTO–C–2024–0048] 

Request for Comments and Testimony 

on the World Intellectual Property 

Organization Treaty on Intellectual 

Property, Genetic Resources and 

Associated Traditional Knowledge 

AGENCY: United States Patent and 

Trademark Office, Department of 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Request for comments and 

notice of hearing. 

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and 

Trademark Office (USPTO), Department 

of Commerce, requests input from all 

interested parties on the World 

Intellectual Property Organization 

(WIPO) Treaty on Intellectual Property, 

Genetic Resources and Associated 

Traditional Knowledge (hereinafter, 

‘‘the Treaty’’) adopted by WIPO Member 

States in Geneva, Switzerland on May 

24, 2024. In particular, the USPTO 

welcomes written comments, and will 

hold a hybrid hearing, on whether the 

United States should sign and 

implement the Treaty and any impacts 

of taking those actions. The text of the 

Treaty can be found on the WIPO 

website at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/ 

mdocs/tk/en/gratk_dc/gratk_dc_7.pdf. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 18, 2025. 

The USPTO will also hold a hybrid 

hearing on this matter on April 29, 

2025, from 9 a.m.–12 p.m. and 1–4 p.m. 

eastern time (ET). If necessary, the 

hearing may continue on April 30, 2025. 

Any interested parties wishing to 

present oral testimony at the hearing 

must submit a written request for an 

opportunity to do so no later than April 

22, 2025. Details on submitting such a 

request are provided below. 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Notices 5829 

1More information on the IGC may be found at: 

https://www.wipo.int/tk/en/igc. 

2WIPO currently has 193 Member States. https:// 

www.wipo.int/members/en/. 

3The current ‘‘IGC Mandate’’, covering the 

biennium 2024/2025, may be found at: https://

www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/tk/en/igc/docs/igcmandate-2024-2025.pdf. 

4That text (known as the ‘‘Basic Proposal’’) may 

be found at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/ 

en/gratk_dc/gratk_dc_3.pdf. In October 2023, 

following a Special Session and Preparatory 

Committee meeting of the IGC, the USPTO 

requested comments on draft text that subsequently 

became the ‘‘Basic Proposal’’ of the diplomatic 

conference. https://www.federalregister.gov/ 

documents/2023/10/24/2023-23387/wipo-igcnegotiations-on-genetic-resources-and-associatedtraditional-knowledge. Comments received by the 

USPTO helped inform positions taken by the 

United States at the diplomatic conference. 

5According to WIPO, as of December 5, 2024, 

thirty-eight delegations had signed the Treaty: 

Algeria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Burkina 

Faso, Cabo Verde, Central African Republic, Chile, 

Colombia, Congo, Coˆte d’Ivoire, Democratic 

People’s Republic of Korea, Dominican Republic, 

Eswatini, Gambia, Ghana, Indonesia, Lesotho, 

Madagascar, Malawi, Marshall Islands, Morocco, 

Namibia, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Niue, Paraguay, 

Peru, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sao Tome 

and Principe, Senegal, South Africa, Togo, United 

Republic of Tanzania, Uganda, Uruguay, Vanuatu, 

and Zimbabwe. https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/ 

www/treaties/en/docs/pdf/gratk.pdf. 

6See, e.g., Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on 

the Law of Treaties. https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/ 

instruments/english/conventions/1_1_1969.pdf. 

7See WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, 

Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional 

Continued 

ADDRESSES: 

I. For Comment Submitters 

For reasons of Government efficiency, 

comments should be submitted through 

the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

https://www.regulations.gov. To submit 

comments via the portal, enter docket 

number PTO–C–2024–0048 on the 

homepage and select ‘‘Search.’’ The site 

will provide a search results page listing 

all documents associated with this 

docket. Find a reference to this request 

for information and select the 

‘‘Comment’’ icon, complete the required 

fields, and enter or attach your 

comments. Attachments to electronic 

comments will be accepted in Adobe®

portable document format or Microsoft 

Word® format. Because comments will 

be made available for public inspection, 

information that the submitter does not 

desire to make public, such as a 

personal address or phone number, 

should not be included. 

Visit the Federal eRulemaking Portal 

(www.regulations.gov) for additional 

instructions on providing comments via 

the portal. If electronic submission of 

comments is not feasible due to a lack 

of access to a computer and/or the 

internet, please submit comments by 

First-Class Mail or Priority Mail to: 

Michael Buckler, Patent Attorney, Mail 

Stop OPIA, U.S. Patent and Trademark 

Office, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 

22313–1450. 

II. For All Hearing Attendees 

The hybrid hearing will be held in 

person in the Clara Barton Auditorium 

at the USPTO, 600 Dulany Street, 

Alexandria, Virginia 22314. The hearing 

will also be available in a virtual format 

for those wishing to attend remotely. 

Prior to the hearing, information on 

attendance will be posted on the Office 

of Policy and International Affairs 

(OPIA) section of the USPTO website, 

https://www.uspto.gov/ip-policy. 

III. For Hearing Testifiers (Requests To 

Present Oral Testimony) 

All interested parties are invited to 

testify at the hearing. Anyone wishing to 

present oral testimony at the hearing 

must submit a request in writing no 

later than April 22, 2025. Requests to 

testify must be submitted by email to 

Michael Buckler at michael.buckler@

uspto.gov or, if email submission is not 

feasible due to a lack of access to a 

computer and/or the internet, by FirstClass Mail or Priority Mail as indicated 

above. 

Requests to testify should specify: 

1. The name of the person wishing to 

testify; 

2. The person’s contact information 

(telephone number and email address); 

3. The organization(s) the person 

represents, if any; 

4. An indication of the amount of time 

needed for the testimony (not to exceed 

5 minutes to allow time for follow-up 

questions); 

5. An indication of whether testimony 

will be provided in person or remotely; 

and 

6. A copy of your prepared remarks. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michael Buckler, Patent Attorney, 

USPTO, Office of Policy and 

International Affairs (OPIA), at 

michael.buckler@uspto.gov (preferred) 

or 571–272–6024. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

WIPO is a specialized United Nations 

agency based in Geneva, Switzerland, 

that focuses on intellectual property. 

Established in September 2000, the 

WIPO Intergovernmental Committee 

(IGC) 1 is a Permanent Committee of 

WIPO where Member States 2 and 

accredited observers can discuss and 

address intellectual property issues that 

arise in the context of access to genetic 

resources (GRs) as well as the protection 

of traditional knowledge (TK) and 

traditional cultural expressions (TCEs). 

The IGC operates in accordance with a 

mandate 3 determined by the WIPO 

General Assembly. 

At its Fifty-Fifth (30th Extraordinary) 

Session, held in Geneva on July 14–22, 

2022, the WIPO General Assembly 

decided to convene a diplomatic 

conference to conclude an International 

Legal Instrument Relating to Intellectual 

Property, Genetic Resources and 

Traditional Knowledge Associated with 

Genetic Resources. 

The diplomatic conference occurred 

on May 13–24, 2024, at WIPO 

Headquarters in Geneva. On May 24, 

2024, WIPO Member States adopted the 

Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic 

Resources and Associated Traditional 

Knowledge. The text of the adopted 

Treaty is different in several respects 

from the proposed text 4 that served as 

the starting point for negotiations at the 

diplomatic conference. 

Article 3 of the Treaty mandates that 

patent applicants disclose the origin/ 

source of a GR, or associated traditional 

knowledge (ATK) provided by 

Indigenous Peoples or local 

communities, in certain circumstances. 

In particular, the disclosure requirement 

is triggered where a claimed invention 

is ‘‘based on’’ a GR or ATK, which 

requires satisfaction of a two-part test: 

(1) the GR or ATK ‘‘must have been 

necessary for the claimed invention’’; 

and (2) ‘‘the claimed invention must 

depend on the specific properties of’’ 

the GR or ATK. Among its 22 articles, 

the Treaty covers several other topics, 

including treaty objectives, definitions, 

exceptions and limitations, nonretroactivity, sanctions and remedies for 

noncompliance, relationship with other 

international agreements, and review 

and potential revision of Treaty text. 

For additional context, the text of the 

Treaty can be found on the WIPO 

website at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/ 

mdocs/tk/en/gratk_dc/gratk_dc_7.pdf. 

Likewise, WIPO’s ‘‘informal summary’’ 

of the Treaty can be found at: https://

www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/mdocs/en/ 

gratk_dc/gratk_dc_exsum.pdf. 

The Treaty is open for signature for 

one year after its adoption (i.e., up to 

May 23, 2025).5 The act of signing does 

not make a Member State a party to (i.e., 

bound by) the Treaty. Rather, signing 

qualifies the signatory Member State to 

proceed to ratification, acceptance, or 

approval; and creates an obligation for 

the Member State to refrain from acts 

that would defeat the object and 

purpose of the Treaty.6 To become a 

party to the Treaty, a Member State 

must undertake a separate step of 

ratification or accession.7


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES
5830 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 11 / Friday, January 17, 2025 / Notices 

Knowledge, Articles 12–13, 18. https://

www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/gratk_dc/gratk_

dc_7.pdf. 

8According to WIPO, as of December 5, 2024, 

only Malawi had ratified or acceded to the Treaty. 

The Treaty will enter into force three 

months after it is ratified or acceded to 

by 15 eligible parties.8 Thereafter, 

Treaty provisions will apply in any 

Member State of WIPO that is or 

subsequently becomes a Contracting 

Party to the Treaty. This means, for 

example, that the Treaty’s required 

disclosure of the origin/source of GRs/ 

ATK will apply to all patent applicants 

who file an application in a Contracting 

Party, including those applicants who 

come from countries that have not 

ratified or acceded to the Treaty. 

Within the U.S. Government, the 

USPTO, based on authority delegated by 

the U.S. Department of State, takes the 

lead in the WIPO IGC among other 

Federal agencies and coordinates and 

develops U.S. positions on issues before 

the WIPO IGC. 

In addition to this request for 

comments and notice of hearing, the 

USPTO will conduct a Tribal 

Consultation to seek input from Tribes 

on the Treaty. Additional details about 

the Tribal Consultation can be found in 

a notice published in this issue of the 

Federal Register. 

II. Substantive Guidance on Comments 

and Testimony 

The USPTO welcomes any relevant, 

written comments or oral testimony on 

the topics described herein, particularly 

on the WIPO Treaty on Intellectual 

Property, Genetic Resources and 

Associated Traditional Knowledge, the 

text of which can be found on the WIPO 

website at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/ 

mdocs/tk/en/gratk_dc/gratk_dc_7.pdf. 

The USPTO is especially interested in 

responses to the questions below. 

However, commenters or testifiers need 

not respond to every question and may 

provide relevant information even if it 

is not responsive to a particular 

question. Comments and testimony 

should be as detailed as possible and 

provide all necessary information to 

enable an objective assessment of the 

views expressed, including specific 

references to: laws, regulations, and 

policy statements; executive, 

presidential, or other orders; 

administrative, court, or other 

determinations; and available data (and 

associated methodology) regarding 

purported and potential impacts of 

policy decisions. 

1. In your view, should the United 

States sign and become a party to the 

WIPO Treaty on Intellectual Property, 

Genetic Resources and Associated 

Traditional Knowledge? In your 

response, please identify and explain 

your reasoning in detail, including legal 

and policy considerations. 

2. In your view, please explain 

whether the Treaty is consistent with 

existing U.S. patent law. In your 

response, please explain your legal 

reasoning and identify the provision(s) 

of the Treaty that you view as consistent 

or inconsistent with U.S. patent law. 

3. If, in your view, the Treaty is 

inconsistent with existing U.S. patent 

law, please identify and explain the 

change(s) to U.S. patent law necessary 

for compliance with the Treaty. In doing 

so, please describe any impact(s) of 

adopting such changes. 

4. In your view, please explain 

whether the Treaty is consistent with 

existing U.S. international obligations, 

including treaties, free trade agreements, 

and other binding international 

agreement(s). In your response, please 

explain your legal reasoning and 

identify any provision(s) of the Treaty 

that you view as consistent or 

inconsistent with specific U.S. 

international obligations. 

5. If the United States does not 

become a party to the Treaty, please 

identify any Treaty provision(s) you 

believe should be incorporated into U.S. 

patent law. In your response, please 

explain the reason(s) for and any 

impact(s) of incorporating the identified 

provision(s) into U.S. patent law. 

6. In your view, please identify and 

explain any impact(s) of implementing 

the Treaty in the United States on 

domestic and global innovation, 

including U.S. science and innovation 

leadership. 

7. In your view, please identify and 

explain any impact(s) of implementing 

the Treaty in the United States on 

businesses, consumers, investors, and 

the economy. 

8. Based on your experiences with 

other countries that require patent 

applicants to disclose the source or 

origin of GRs or ATK, please identify 

and explain any possible impact(s) of 

Treaty implementation in the United 

States. 

III. Additional Information on Hearing 

Speaking slots are limited, and the 

USPTO may be unable to honor all 

requests. If more requests to provide 

oral testimony are received than time 

allows, requesters will be invited to 

submit written comments. Time slots 

will be a maximum of five minutes each 

to allow for follow-up questions on 

testimony or corresponding comments. 

Speakers providing testimony at the 

hearing should submit a written copy of 

their testimony for inclusion in the 

record of the proceedings no later than 

April 22, 2025. Speakers will have one 

week following the hearing to submit 

any supplemental materials referenced 

during their testimony. Such materials 

must be submitted by email to Michael 

Buckler at michael.buckler@uspto.gov 

or, if email submission is not feasible 

due to a lack of access to a computer 

and/or the internet, by First-Class Mail 

or Priority Mail as indicated above. 

Before the hearing, an agenda of 

witness testimony will be sent to 

testifiers and posted on the OPIA 

section of the USPTO website, https:// 

www.uspto.gov/ip-policy. 

If time allows, the USPTO may permit 

unscheduled testimony at the hearing. 

The hearing will be physically 

accessible to people with disabilities. 

Individuals requiring accommodation, 

such as sign language interpretation or 

other ancillary aids, should 

communicate their needs to the person 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this notice at least 

seven business days prior to the hearing. 

A recording of the hearing will be 

posted on the OPIA section of the 

USPTO website, https://www.uspto.gov/ 

ip-policy, as soon as possible after the 

hearing. 

A transcript of the hearing will be 

available on the OPIA section of the 

USPTO website, https://www.uspto.gov/ 

ip-policy, as soon as possible after the 

hearing. 

Derrick L. Brent, 

Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for 

Intellectual Property and Acting Director of 

the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office. 

[FR Doc. 2025–01090 Filed 1–16–25; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION 

BUREAU 

[Docket No. CFPB–2025–0006] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities: Comment Request 

AGENCY: Consumer Financial Protection 

Bureau. 

ACTION: Notice and request for comment. 

SUMMARY: In accordance with the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(PRA), the Consumer Financial 

Protection Bureau (CFPB) requests the 

Office of Management and Budget’s 

(OMB’s) approval of an information 

collection titled ‘‘Auto Loan Survey.’’ 

DATES: Written comments are 

encouraged and must be received on or 

before March 18, 2025 to be assured of 

consideration. 


KHAMMOND on DSK9W7S144PROD with NOTICES