HR 3309 RFS
tent each party to the action may seek non-
documentary discovery as otherwise provided in 
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 
(B) ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION.—If the 
parties determine that the discovery of elec-
tronic communication is appropriate, whether 
such discovery shall occur after the parties have 
exchanged initial disclosures and core documen-
tary evidence and whether such discovery shall 
be in accordance with the following: 
(i) Any request for the production of 
electronic communication shall be specific 
and may not be a general request for the 
production of information relating to a 
product or business. 
(ii) Each request shall identify the 
custodian of the information requested, the 
search terms, and a time frame. The par-
ties shall cooperate to identify the proper 
custodians, the proper search terms, and 
the proper time frame. 
(iii) A party may not submit produc-
tion requests to more than 5 custodians, 
unless the parties jointly agree to modify 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
the number of production requests without 
leave of the court. 
(iv) The court may consider contested 
requests for up to 5 additional custodians 
per producing party, upon a showing of a 
distinct need based on the size, complexity, 
and issues of the case. 
(v) If a party requests the discovery 
of electronic communication for additional 
custodians beyond the limits agreed to by 
the parties or granted by the court, the re-
questing party shall bear all reasonable 
costs caused by such additional discovery. 
(C) ADDITIONAL DOCUMENT DISCOVERY.— 
Whether the following should apply: 
(i) IN GENERAL.—Each party to the 
action may seek any additional document 
discovery otherwise permitted under the 
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, if such 
party bears the reasonable costs, including 
reasonable attorney’s fees, of the additional 
document discovery. 
(ii) REQUIREMENTS FOR ADDITIONAL 
DOCUMENT DISCOVERY.—Unless the par-
ties mutually agree otherwise, no party 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
may be permitted additional document dis-
covery unless such a party posts a bond, or 
provides other security, in an amount suffi-
cient to cover the expected costs of such 
additional document discovery, or makes a 
showing to the court that such party has 
the financial capacity to pay the costs of 
such additional document discovery. 
(iii) LIMITS
ON
ADDITIONAL
DOCU-
MENT DISCOVERY.—A court, upon motion, 
may determine that a request for addi-
tional document discovery is excessive, ir-
relevant, or otherwise abusive and may set 
limits on such additional document dis-
covery. 
(iv) GOOD CAUSE MODIFICATION.—A 
court, upon motion and for good cause 
shown, may modify the requirements of 
subparagraphs (A) and (B) and any defini-
tion under paragraph (3). Not later than 
30 days after the pretrial conference under 
Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil Pro-
cedure, the parties shall jointly submit any 
proposed modifications of the requirements 
of subparagraphs (A) and (B) and any def-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
inition under paragraph (3), unless the 
parties do not agree, in which case each 
party shall submit any proposed modifica-
tion of such party and a summary of the 
disagreement over the modification. 
(v) COMPUTER CODE.—A court, upon 
motion and for good cause shown, may de-
termine that computer code should be in-
cluded in the discovery of core documen-
tary evidence. The discovery of computer 
code shall occur after the parties have ex-
changed initial disclosures and other core 
documentary evidence. 
(D) DISCOVERY SEQUENCE AND SCOPE.— 
Whether the parties shall discuss and address 
in the written report filed pursuant to Rule 
26(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 
the views and proposals of each party on the 
following: 
(i) When the discovery of core docu-
mentary evidence should be completed. 
(ii) Whether additional document dis-
covery will be sought under subparagraph 
(C). 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(iii) Any issues about infringement, 
invalidity, or damages that, if resolved be-
fore the additional discovery described in 
subparagraph (C) commences, might sim-
plify or streamline the case, including the 
identification of any terms or phrases re-
lating to any patent claim at issue to be 
construed by the court and whether the 
early construction of any of those terms or 
phrases would be helpful. 
(3) DEFINITIONS.—In this subsection: 
(A) CORE DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE.—The 
term ‘‘core documentary evidence’’— 
(i) includes— 
(I) documents relating to the 
conception of, reduction to practice of, 
and application for, the patent or pat-
ents at issue; 
(II) documents sufficient to show 
the technical operation of the product 
or process identified in the complaint 
as infringing the patent or patents at 
issue; 
(III) documents relating to po-
tentially invalidating prior art; 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(IV) documents relating to any 
licensing of, or other transfer of rights 
to, the patent or patents at issue be-
fore the date on which the complaint 
is filed; 
(V) documents sufficient to show 
profit attributable to the claimed in-
vention of the patent or patents at 
issue; 
(VI) documents relating to any 
knowledge by the accused infringer of 
the patent or patents at issue before 
the date on which the complaint is 
filed; 
(VII) documents relating to any 
knowledge by the patentee of infringe-
ment of the patent or patents at issue 
before the date on which the com-
plaint is filed; 
(VIII) documents relating to any 
licensing term or pricing commitment 
to which the patent or patents may be 
subject through any agency or stand-
ard-setting body; and 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(IX) 
documents 
sufficient 
to 
show any marking or other notice pro-
vided of the patent or patents at 
issue; and 
(ii) does not include computer code, 
except as specified in paragraph (2)(C)(v). 
(B) ELECTRONIC
COMMUNICATION.—The 
term ‘‘electronic communication’’ means any 
form of electronic communication, including 
email, text message, or instant message. 
(4) 
IMPLEMENTATION
BY
THE
DISTRICT 
COURTS.—Not later than 6 months after the date on 
which the Judicial Conference has developed the 
rules and procedures required by this subsection, 
each United States district court and the United 
States Court of Federal Claims shall revise the ap-
plicable local rules for such court to implement such 
rules and procedures. 
(5) AUTHORITY FOR JUDICIAL CONFERENCE TO 
REVIEW AND MODIFY.— 
(A) STUDY OF EFFICACY OF RULES AND 
PROCEDURES.—The Judicial Conference shall 
study the efficacy of the rules and procedures 
required by this subsection during the 4-year 
period beginning on the date on which such 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
rules and procedures by the district courts and 
the United States Court of Federal Claims are 
first implemented. The Judicial Conference may 
modify such rules and procedures following 
such 4-year period. 
(B) INITIAL MODIFICATIONS.—Before the 
expiration of the 4-year period described in sub-
paragraph (A), the Judicial Conference may 
modify the requirements under this sub-
section— 
(i) by designating categories of ‘‘core 
documentary evidence’’, in addition to 
those designated under paragraph (3)(A), 
as the Judicial Conference determines to 
be appropriate and necessary; and 
(ii) as otherwise necessary to prevent 
a manifest injustice, the imposition of a re-
quirement the costs of which clearly out-
weigh its benefits, or a result that could 
not reasonably have been intended by the 
Congress. 
(b) JUDICIAL CONFERENCE PATENT CASE MANAGE-
MENT.—The Judicial Conference of the United States, 
using existing resources, shall develop case management 
procedures to be implemented by the United States dis-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
trict courts and the United States Court of Federal Claims 
for any civil action arising under any Act of Congress re-
lating to patents, including initial disclosure and early case 
management conference practices that— 
(1) will identify any potential dispositive issues 
of the case; and 
(2) focus on early summary judgment motions 
when resolution of issues may lead to expedited dis-
position of the case. 
(c) REVISION
OF FORM
FOR PATENT INFRINGE-
MENT.— 
(1) ELIMINATION
OF
FORM.—The Supreme 
Court, using existing resources, shall eliminate Form 
18 in the Appendix to the Federal Rules of Civil 
Procedure (relating to Complaint for Patent In-
fringement), effective on the date of the enactment 
of this Act. 
(2) REVISED FORM.—The Supreme Court may 
prescribe a new form or forms setting out model al-
legations of patent infringement that, at a minimum, 
notify accused infringers of the asserted claim or 
claims, the products or services accused of infringe-
ment, and the plaintiff’s theory for how each ac-
cused product or service meets each limitation of 
each asserted claim. The Judicial Conference should 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
exercise the authority under section 2073 of title 28, 
United States Code, to make recommendations with 
respect to such new form or forms. 
(d) PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL-PROPERTY LI-
CENSES IN BANKRUPTCY.— 
(1) IN
GENERAL.—Section 1522 of title 11, 
United States Code, is amended by adding at the 
end the following: 
‘‘(e) Section 365(n) shall apply to cases under this 
chapter. If the foreign representative rejects or repudiates 
a contract under which the debtor is a licensor of intellec-
tual property, the licensee under such contract shall be 
entitled to make the election and exercise the rights de-
scribed in section 365(n).’’. 
(2) TRADEMARKS.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—Section 101(35A) of 
title 11, United States Code, is amended— 
(i) in subparagraph (E), by striking 
‘‘or’’; 
(ii) in subparagraph (F), by striking 
‘‘title 17;’’ and inserting ‘‘title 17; or’’; and 
(iii) by adding after subparagraph (F) 
the following new subparagraph: 
‘‘(G) a trademark, service mark, or trade 
name, as those terms are defined in section 45 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
of the Act of July 5, 1946 (commonly referred 
to as the ‘Trademark Act of 1946’) (15 U.S.C. 
1127);’’. 
(B) CONFORMING
AMENDMENT.—Section 
365(n)(2) of title 11, United States Code, is 
amended— 
(i) in subparagraph (B)— 
(I) by striking ‘‘royalty pay-
ments’’ and inserting ‘‘royalty or 
other payments’’; and 
(II) by striking ‘‘and’’ after the 
semicolon; 
(ii) in subparagraph (C), by striking 
the period at the end of clause (ii) and in-
serting ‘‘; and’’; and 
(iii) by adding at the end the fol-
lowing new subparagraph: 
‘‘(D) in the case of a trademark, service mark, 
or trade name, the trustee shall not be relieved of 
a contractual obligation to monitor and control the 
quality of a licensed product or service.’’. 
(3) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made 
by this subsection shall take effect on the date of the 
enactment of this Act and shall apply to any case 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
that is pending on, or for which a petition or com-
plaint is filed on or after, such date of enactment. 
SEC. 7. SMALL BUSINESS EDUCATION, OUTREACH, AND IN-
FORMATION ACCESS. 
(a) SMALL
BUSINESS
EDUCATION
AND
OUT-
REACH.— 
(1) RESOURCES FOR SMALL BUSINESS.—Using 
existing resources, the Director shall develop edu-
cational resources for small businesses to address 
concerns arising from patent infringement. 
(2) SMALL BUSINESS PATENT OUTREACH.—The 
existing small business patent outreach programs of 
the Office, and the relevant offices at the Small 
Business Administration and the Minority Business 
Development Agency, shall provide education and 
awareness on abusive patent litigation practices. The 
Director may give special consideration to the 
unique needs of small firms owned by disabled vet-
erans, service-disabled veterans, women, and minor-
ity entrepreneurs in planning and executing the out-
reach efforts by the Office. 
(b) IMPROVING INFORMATION TRANSPARENCY FOR 
SMALL BUSINESS AND THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND 
TRADEMARK OFFICE USERS.— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(1) WEB SITE.—Using existing resources, the 
Director shall create a user-friendly section on the 
official Web site of the Office to notify the public 
when a patent case is brought in Federal court and, 
with respect to each patent at issue in such case, the 
Director shall include— 
(A) information disclosed under sub-
sections (b) and (d) of section 290 of title 35, 
United States Code, as added by section 4(a) of 
this Act; and 
(B) any other information the Director de-
termines to be relevant. 
(2) FORMAT.—In order to promote accessibility 
for the public, the information described in para-
graph (1) shall be searchable by patent number, pat-
ent art area, and entity. 
SEC. 8. STUDIES ON PATENT TRANSACTIONS, QUALITY, 
AND EXAMINATION. 
(a) STUDY ON SECONDARY MARKET OVERSIGHT FOR 
PATENT TRANSACTIONS TO PROMOTE TRANSPARENCY 
AND ETHICAL BUSINESS PRACTICES.— 
(1) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Director, in con-
sultation with the Secretary of Commerce, the Sec-
retary of the Treasury, the Chairman of the Securi-
ties and Exchange Commission, the heads of other 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
relevant agencies, and interested parties, shall, using 
existing resources of the Office, conduct a study— 
(A) to develop legislative recommendations 
to ensure greater transparency and account-
ability in patent transactions occurring on the 
secondary market; 
(B) to examine the economic impact that 
the patent secondary market has on the United 
States; 
(C) to examine licensing and other over-
sight requirements that may be placed on the 
patent secondary market, including on the par-
ticipants in such markets, to ensure that the 
market is a level playing field and that brokers 
in the market have the requisite expertise and 
adhere to ethical business practices; and 
(D) to examine the requirements placed on 
other markets. 
(2) REPORT
ON
STUDY.—Not later than 18 
months after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Director shall submit a report to the Committee 
on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives 
and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate 
on the findings and recommendations of the Director 
from the study required under paragraph (1). 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(b) STUDY ON PATENTS OWNED BY THE UNITED 
STATES GOVERNMENT.— 
(1) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Director, in con-
sultation with the heads of relevant agencies and in-
terested parties, shall, using existing resources of the 
Office, conduct a study on patents owned by the 
United States Government that— 
(A) examines how such patents are li-
censed and sold, and any litigation relating to 
the licensing or sale of such patents; 
(B) provides legislative and administrative 
recommendations on whether there should be 
restrictions placed on patents acquired from the 
United States Government; 
(C) examines whether or not each relevant 
agency maintains adequate records on the pat-
ents owned by such agency, specifically whether 
such agency addresses licensing, assignment, 
and Government grants for technology related 
to such patents; and 
(D) provides recommendations to ensure 
that each relevant agency has an adequate 
point of contact that is responsible for man-
aging the patent portfolio of the agency. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(2) REPORT ON STUDY.—Not later than 1 year 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Di-
rector shall submit to the Committee on the Judici-
ary of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary of the Senate a report on 
the findings and recommendations of the Director 
from the study required under paragraph (1). 
(c) STUDY ON PATENT QUALITY AND ACCESS TO 
THE BEST INFORMATION DURING EXAMINATION.— 
(1) GAO STUDY.—The Comptroller General of 
the United States shall, using existing resources, 
conduct a study on patent examination at the Office 
and the technologies available to improve examina-
tion and improve patent quality. 
(2) CONTENTS OF THE STUDY.—The study re-
quired under paragraph (1) shall include the fol-
lowing: 
(A) An examination of patent quality at 
the Office. 
(B) An examination of ways to improve 
patent quality, specifically through technology, 
that shall include examining best practices at 
foreign patent offices and the use of existing 
off-the-shelf technologies to improve patent ex-
amination. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(C) A description of how patents are clas-
sified. 
(D) An examination of procedures in place 
to prevent double patenting through filing by 
applicants in multiple art areas. 
(E) An examination of the types of off-the- 
shelf prior art databases and search software 
used by foreign patent offices and governments, 
particularly in Europe and Asia, and whether 
those databases and search tools could be used 
by the Office to improve patent examination. 
(F) An examination of any other areas the 
Comptroller General determines to be relevant. 
(3) REPORT ON STUDY.—Not later than 1 year 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Comptroller General shall submit to the Committee 
on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives 
and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate 
a report on the findings and recommendations from 
the study required by this subsection, including rec-
ommendations for any changes to laws and regula-
tions that will improve the examination of patent ap-
plications and patent quality. 
(d) STUDY ON PATENT SMALL CLAIMS COURT.— 
(1) STUDY REQUIRED.— 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(A) IN
GENERAL.—The Director of the 
Administrative Office of the United States 
Courts, in consultation with the Director of the 
Federal Judicial Center and the United States 
Patent and Trademark Office, shall, using ex-
isting resources, conduct a study to examine the 
idea of developing a pilot program for patent 
small claims procedures in certain judicial dis-
tricts within the existing patent pilot program 
mandated by Public Law 111–349. 
(B) CONTENTS
OF
STUDY.—The study 
under subparagraph (A) shall examine— 
(i) the necessary criteria for using 
small claims procedures; 
(ii) the costs that would be incurred 
for establishing, maintaining, and oper-
ating such a pilot program; and 
(iii) the steps that would be taken to 
ensure that the procedures used in the 
pilot program are not misused for abusive 
patent litigation. 
(2) REPORT ON STUDY.—Not later than 1 year 
after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Di-
rector of the Administrative Office of the United 
States Courts shall submit a report to the Com-
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
mittee on the Judiciary of the House of Representa-
tives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
Senate on the findings and recommendations of the 
Director of the Administrative Office from the study 
required under paragraph (1). 
(e) STUDY ON DEMAND LETTERS.— 
(1) STUDY.—The Director, in consultation with 
the heads of other appropriate agencies, shall, using 
existing resources, conduct a study of the prevalence 
of the practice of sending patent demand letters in 
bad faith and the extent to which that practice may, 
through fraudulent or deceptive practices, impose a 
negative impact on the marketplace. 
(2) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Director shall submit a report to the Committee on 
the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and 
the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate on the 
findings and recommendations of the Director from 
the study required under paragraph (1). 
(3) PATENT
DEMAND
LETTER
DEFINED.—In 
this subsection, the term ‘‘patent demand letter’’ 
means a written communication relating to a patent 
that states or indicates, directly or indirectly, that 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
the recipient or anyone affiliated with the recipient 
is or may be infringing the patent. 
(f) STUDY ON BUSINESS METHOD PATENT QUAL-
ITY.— 
(1) GAO STUDY.—The Comptroller General of 
the United States shall, using existing resources, 
conduct a study on the volume and nature of litiga-
tion involving business method patents. 
(2) CONTENTS OF STUDY.—The study required 
under paragraph (1) shall focus on examining the 
quality of business method patents asserted in suits 
alleging patent infringement, and may include an ex-
amination of any other areas that the Comptroller 
General determines to be relevant. 
(3) REPORT TO CONGRESS.—Not later than 1 
year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Comptroller General shall submit to the Committee 
on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives 
and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate 
a report on the findings and recommendations from 
the study required by this subsection, including rec-
ommendations for any changes to laws or regula-
tions that the Comptroller General considers appro-
priate on the basis of the study. 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(g) STUDY ON IMPACT OF LEGISLATION ON ABILITY 
OF INDIVIDUALS AND SMALL BUSINESSES TO PROTECT 
EXCLUSIVE
RIGHTS
TO
INVENTIONS
AND
DISCOV-
ERIES.— 
(1) STUDY REQUIRED.—The Director, in con-
sultation with the Secretary of Commerce, the Direc-
tor of the Administrative Office of the United States 
Courts, the Director of the Federal Judicial Center, 
the heads of other relevant agencies, and interested 
parties, shall, using existing resources of the Office, 
conduct a study to examine the economic impact of 
sections 3, 4, and 5 of this Act, and any amend-
ments made by such sections, on the ability of indi-
viduals and small businesses owned by women, vet-
erans, and minorities to assert, secure, and vindicate 
the constitutionally guaranteed exclusive right to in-
ventions and discoveries by such individuals and 
small business. 
(2) REPORT
ON
STUDY.—Not later than 2 
years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 
Director shall submit to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary of the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary of the Senate a report on 
the findings and recommendations of the Director 
from the study required under paragraph (1). 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
HR 3309 RFS
(1) AMENDMENTS.—Section 154(b)(1)(B) of 
title 35, United States Code, is amended— 
(A) in the matter preceding clause (i), by 
striking ‘‘not including—’’ and inserting ‘‘the 
term of the patent shall be extended 1 day for 
each day after the end of that 3-year period 
until the patent is issued, not including—’’; 
(B) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘consumed by 
continued examination of the application re-
quested by the applicant’’ and inserting ‘‘con-
sumed after continued examination of the appli-
cation is requested by the applicant’’; 
(C) in clause (iii), by striking the comma 
at the end and inserting a period; and 
(D) by striking the matter following clause 
(iii). 
(2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made 
by this subsection shall take effect on the date of the 
enactment of this Act and apply to any patent appli-
cation that is pending on, or filed on or after, such 
date of enactment. 
(f) CLARIFICATION OF JURISDICTION.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Federal interest in pre-
venting inconsistent final judicial determinations as 
to the legal force or effect of the claims in a patent 
VerDate Mar 15 2010 
04:08 Dec 10, 2013
Jkt 039200
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H3309.RFS
H3309
smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS