‘‘(2) SUPPLEMENTAL
STATEMENTS
NOT
RE-
QUIRED.—If an individual has executed an oath or 
declaration under subsection (a) or an assignment 
meeting the requirements of subsection (e) with re-
spect to an application for patent, the Director may 
not thereafter require that individual to make any 
additional oath, declaration, or other statement 
equivalent to those required by this section in con-
nection with the application for patent or any patent 
issuing thereon. 
‘‘(3) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—No patent shall be in-
valid or unenforceable based upon the failure to 
comply with a requirement under this section if the 
failure is remedied as provided under paragraph (1). 
‘‘(i) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PENALTIES.—Any dec-
laration or statement filed pursuant to this section shall 
contain an acknowledgment that any willful false state-
ment made in such declaration or statement is punishable 
under section 1001 of title 18 by fine or imprisonment 
of not more than 5 years, or both.’’. 
(2) RELATIONSHIP
TO
DIVISIONAL
APPLICA-
TIONS.—Section 121 of title 35, United States Code, 
is amended by striking ‘‘If a divisional application’’ 
and all that follows through ‘‘inventor.’’. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(3) REQUIREMENTS FOR NONPROVISIONAL AP-
PLICATIONS.—Section 111(a) of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended— 
(A) in paragraph (2)(C), by striking ‘‘by 
the applicant’’ and inserting ‘‘or declaration’’; 
(B) in the heading for paragraph (3), by 
striking ‘‘AND OATH’’; and 
(C) by striking ‘‘and oath’’ each place it 
appears. 
(4) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The item re-
lating to section 115 in the table of sections for 
chapter 11 of title 35, United States Code, is 
amended to read as follows: 
‘‘115. Inventor’s oath or declaration.’’. 
(b) SPECIFICATION.—Section 112 of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first paragraph— 
(A) by striking ‘‘The specification’’ and in-
serting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification’’; 
and 
(B) by striking ‘‘of carrying out his inven-
tion’’ and inserting ‘‘or joint inventor of car-
rying out the invention’’; 
(2) in the second paragraph— 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(A) by striking ‘‘The specifications’’ and 
inserting ‘‘(b) CONCLUSION.—The specifica-
tions’’; and 
(B) by striking ‘‘applicant regards as his 
invention’’ and inserting ‘‘inventor or a joint in-
ventor regards as the invention’’; 
(3) in the third paragraph, by striking ‘‘A 
claim’’ and inserting ‘‘(c) FORM.—A claim’’; 
(4) in the fourth paragraph, by striking ‘‘Sub-
ject to the following paragraph,’’ and inserting ‘‘(d) 
REFERENCE
IN DEPENDENT FORMS.—Subject to 
subsection (e),’’; 
(5) in the fifth paragraph, by striking ‘‘A 
claim’’ and inserting ‘‘(e) REFERENCE IN MULTIPLE 
DEPENDENT FORM.—A claim’’; and 
(6) in the last paragraph, by striking ‘‘An ele-
ment’’ and inserting ‘‘(f) ELEMENT IN CLAIM FOR 
A COMBINATION.—An element’’. 
SEC. 5. RIGHT OF THE INVENTOR TO OBTAIN DAMAGES. 
(a) DAMAGES.—Section 284 of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘§ 284. Damages 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Upon finding for the claimant 
the court shall award the claimant damages adequate to 
compensate for the infringement but in no event less than 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
a reasonable royalty for the use made of the invention by 
the infringer, together with interest and costs as fixed by 
the court, subject to the provisions of this section. 
‘‘(b) DETERMINATION OF DAMAGES; EVIDENCE CON-
SIDERED; PROCEDURE.—The court may receive expert 
testimony as an aid to the determination of damages or 
of what royalty would be reasonable under the cir-
cumstances. The admissibility of such testimony shall be 
governed by the rules of evidence governing expert testi-
mony. When the damages are not found by a jury, the 
court shall assess them. 
‘‘(c) STANDARD
FOR CALCULATING REASONABLE 
ROYALTY.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The court shall determine, 
based on the facts of the case and after adducing 
any further evidence the court deems necessary, 
which of the following methods shall be used by the 
court or the jury in calculating a reasonable royalty 
pursuant to subsection (a). The court shall also 
identify the factors that are relevant to the deter-
mination of a reasonable royalty, and the court or 
jury, as the case may be, shall consider only those 
factors in making such determination. 
‘‘(A) ENTIRE
MARKET
VALUE.—Upon a 
showing to the satisfaction of the court that the 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
claimed invention’s specific contribution over 
the prior art is the predominant basis for mar-
ket demand for an infringing product or proc-
ess, damages may be based upon the entire 
market value of that infringing product or proc-
ess. 
‘‘(B) ESTABLISHED
ROYALTY
BASED
ON 
MARKETPLACE LICENSING.—Upon a showing to 
the satisfaction of the court that the claimed in-
vention has been the subject of a nonexclusive 
license for the use made of the invention by the 
infringer, to a number of persons sufficient to 
indicate a general marketplace recognition of 
the reasonableness of the licensing terms, if the 
license was secured prior to the filing of the 
case before the court, and the court determines 
that the infringer’s use is of substantially the 
same scope, volume, and benefit of the rights 
granted under such license, damages may be 
determined on the basis of the terms of such li-
cense. Upon a showing to the satisfaction of the 
court that the claimed invention has sufficiently 
similar noninfringing substitutes in the relevant 
market, which have themselves been the subject 
of such nonexclusive licenses, and the court de-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
termines that the infringer’s use is of substan-
tially the same scope, volume, and benefit of the 
rights granted under such licenses, damages 
may be determined on the basis of the terms of 
such licenses. 
‘‘(C) VALUATION CALCULATION.—Upon a 
determination by the court that the showings 
required under subparagraphs (A) and (B) have 
not been made, the court shall conduct an anal-
ysis to ensure that a reasonable royalty is ap-
plied only to the portion of the economic value 
of the infringing product or process properly at-
tributable to the claimed invention’s specific 
contribution over the prior art. In the case of 
a combination invention whose elements are 
present individually in the prior art, the con-
tribution over the prior art may include the 
value of the additional function resulting from 
the combination, as well as the enhanced value, 
if any, of some or all of the prior art elements 
as part of the combination, if the patentee dem-
onstrates that value. 
‘‘(2) ADDITIONAL FACTORS.—Where the court 
determines it to be appropriate in determining a rea-
sonable royalty under paragraph (1), the court may 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
also consider, or direct the jury to consider, any 
other relevant factors under applicable law. 
‘‘(d) INAPPLICABILITY TO OTHER DAMAGES ANAL-
YSIS.—The methods for calculating a reasonable royalty 
described in subsection (c) shall have no application to the 
calculation of an award of damages that does not neces-
sitate the determination of a reasonable royalty as a basis 
for monetary relief sought by the claimant. 
‘‘(e) WILLFUL INFRINGEMENT.— 
‘‘(1) INCREASED DAMAGES.—A court that has 
determined that an infringer has willfully infringed 
a patent or patents may increase damages up to 3 
times the amount of the damages found or assessed 
under subsection (a), except that increased damages 
under this paragraph shall not apply to provisional 
rights under section 154(d). 
‘‘(2) PERMITTED
GROUNDS
FOR
WILLFUL-
NESS.—A court may find that an infringer has will-
fully infringed a patent only if the patent owner pre-
sents clear and convincing evidence that acting with 
objective recklessness— 
‘‘(A) after receiving written notice from 
the patentee— 
‘‘(i) alleging acts of infringement in a 
manner sufficient to give the infringer an 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
objectively reasonable apprehension of suit 
on such patent, and 
‘‘(ii) identifying with particularity 
each claim of the patent, each product or 
process that the patent owner alleges in-
fringes the patent, and the relationship of 
such product or process to such claim, 
the infringer, after a reasonable opportunity to 
investigate, thereafter performed 1 or more of 
the alleged acts of infringement; 
‘‘(B) the infringer intentionally copied the 
patented invention with knowledge that it was 
patented; or 
‘‘(C) after having been found by a court to 
have infringed that patent, the infringer en-
gaged in conduct that was not colorably dif-
ferent from the conduct previously found to 
have infringed the patent, and which resulted in 
a separate finding of infringement of the same 
patent. 
‘‘(3) LIMITATIONS ON WILLFULNESS.— 
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—A court may not find 
that an infringer has willfully infringed a patent 
under paragraph (2) for any period of time dur-
ing which the infringer had an informed good 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
faith belief that the patent was invalid or unen-
forceable, or would not be infringed by the con-
duct later shown to constitute infringement of 
the patent. 
‘‘(B) GOOD FAITH ESTABLISHED.—An in-
formed good faith belief within the meaning of 
subparagraph (A) may be established by— 
‘‘(i) reasonable reliance on advice of 
counsel; 
‘‘(ii) 
evidence 
that 
the 
infringer 
sought to modify its conduct to avoid in-
fringement once it had discovered the pat-
ent; or 
‘‘(iii) other evidence a court may find 
sufficient to establish such good faith be-
lief. 
‘‘(C) RELEVANCE
OF
NOT
PRESENTING 
CERTAIN EVIDENCE.—The decision of the in-
fringer not to present evidence of advice of 
counsel is not relevant to a determination of 
willful infringement under paragraph (2). 
‘‘(4) LIMITATION
ON
PLEADING.—Before the 
date on which a court determines that the patent in 
suit is not invalid, is enforceable, and has been in-
fringed by the infringer, a patentee may not plead 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
and a court may not determine that an infringer has 
willfully infringed a patent.’’. 
(b) REPORT TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 2 years after 
the date of enactment of this Act, the Director shall 
report to the Committee on the Judiciary of the 
House of Representatives and the Committee on the 
Judiciary of the Senate, the findings and rec-
ommendations of the Director on the operation of 
prior user rights in selected countries in the indus-
trialized world. The report shall include the fol-
lowing: 
(A) A comparison between patent laws of 
the United States and the laws of other indus-
trialized countries, including the European 
Union, Japan, Canada, and Australia. 
(B) An analysis of the effect of prior user 
rights on innovation rates in the selected coun-
tries. 
(C) An analysis of the correlation, if any, 
between prior user rights and start-up enter-
prises and the ability to attract venture capital 
to start new companies. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(D) An analysis of the effect of prior user 
rights, if any, on small businesses, universities, 
and individual inventors. 
(E) An analysis of legal and constitutional 
issues, if any, that arise from placing trade se-
cret law in patent law. 
(2) CONSULTATION WITH OTHER AGENCIES.— 
In preparing the report required under paragraph 
(1), the Director shall consult with the Secretary of 
State and the Attorney General. 
(c) DEFENSE TO INFRINGEMENT BASED ON EAR-
LIER INVENTOR.—Section 273(b)(6) of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(6) PERSONAL DEFENSE.—The defense under 
this section may be asserted only by the person who 
performed or caused the performance of the acts 
necessary to establish the defense as well as any 
other entity that controls, is controlled by, or is 
under common control with such person and, except 
for any transfer to the patent owner, the right to as-
sert the defense shall not be licensed or assigned or 
transferred to another person except as an ancillary 
and subordinate part of a good faith assignment or 
transfer for other reasons of the entire enterprise or 
line of business to which the defense relates. Not-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
withstanding the preceding sentence, any person 
may, on its own behalf, assert a defense based on 
the exhaustion of rights provided under paragraph 
(3), including any necessary elements thereof.’’. 
(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 
this section shall apply to any civil action commenced on 
or after the date of enactment of this Act. 
(e) REVIEW EVERY 7 YEARS.—Not later than the 
end of the 7-year period beginning on the date of the en-
actment of this Act, and the end of every 7-year period 
thereafter, the Director shall— 
(1) conduct a study on the effectiveness and ef-
ficiency of the amendments made by this section; 
and 
(2) 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 re-
sults of the study, including any recommendations 
the Director has on amendments to the law and 
other recommendations of the Director with respect 
to the right of the inventor to obtain damages for 
patent infringement. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
SEC. 6. POST-GRANT PROCEDURES AND OTHER QUALITY 
ENHANCEMENTS. 
(a) CITATION OF PRIOR ART.—Section 301 of title 
35, United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘§ 301. Citation of prior art 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Any person at any time may cite 
to the Office in writing— 
‘‘(1) prior art consisting of patents or printed 
publications which that person believes to have a 
bearing on the patentability of any claim of a par-
ticular patent; 
‘‘(2) written statements of the patent owner 
filed in a proceeding before a Federal court, the Pat-
ent and Trademark Office, or the United States 
International Trade Commission under section 337 
of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1337), in 
which the patent owner takes a position on the scope 
of one or more patent claims; or 
‘‘(3) documentary evidence that the claimed in-
vention was in substantial public use or on sale in 
the United States more than 1 year prior to the date 
of the application for patent in the United States. 
‘‘(b) SUBMISSIONS PART OF OFFICIAL FILE.—If the 
person citing prior art, written submissions, or documen-
tary evidence under subsection (a) explains in writing the 
pertinence and manner of applying the prior art or docu-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
mentary evidence to at least one claim of the patent, the 
citation of the prior art or documentary evidence (as the 
case may be) and the explanation thereof shall become a 
part of the official file of the patent. 
‘‘(c) PROCEDURES FOR WRITTEN STATEMENTS.— 
‘‘(1) 
SUBMISSION
OF
ADDITIONAL
MATE-
RIALS.—A party that submits written statements 
under subsection (a)(2) in a proceeding shall include 
any other documents, pleadings, or evidence from 
the proceeding that address the patent owner’s 
statements or the claims addressed by the written 
statements. 
‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON USE OF STATEMENTS.— 
Written statements submitted under subsection 
(a)(2) shall not be considered for any purpose other 
than to determine the proper meaning of the claims 
that are the subject of the request in a proceeding 
ordered pursuant to section 304 or 313. Any such 
written statements, and any materials submitted 
under paragraph (1), that are subject to an applica-
ble protective order shall be redacted to exclude in-
formation subject to the order. 
‘‘(d) IDENTITY WITHHELD.—Upon the written re-
quest of the person making the citation under subsection 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(a), the person’s identity shall be excluded from the patent 
file and kept confidential.’’. 
(b) REQUEST FOR REEXAMINATION.—The first sen-
tence of section 302 of title 35, United States Code, is 
amended to read as follows: ‘‘Any person at any time may 
file a request for reexamination by the Office of any claim 
on a patent on the basis of any prior art or documentary 
evidence cited under paragraph (1) or (3) of subsection 
(a) of section 301 of this title.’’. 
(c) REEXAMINATION.—Section 303(a) of title 35, 
United States Code, is amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(a) Within three months following the filing of a re-
quest for reexamination under section 302, the Director 
shall determine whether a substantial new question of pat-
entability affecting any claim of the patent concerned is 
raised by the request, with or without consideration of 
other patents or printed publications. On the Director’s 
own initiative, and at any time, the Director may deter-
mine whether a substantial new question of patentability 
is raised by patents and publications discovered by the Di-
rector, is cited under section 301, or is cited by any person 
other than the owner of the patent under section 302 or 
section 311. The existence of a substantial new question 
of patentability is not precluded by the fact that a patent 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
or printed publication was previously considered by the Of-
fice.’’. 
(d) REQUEST
FOR INTER PARTES REEXAMINA-
TION.—Section 311(a) of title 35, United States Code, is 
amended to read as follows: 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Any third-party requester at any 
time may file a request for inter partes reexamination by 
the Office of a patent on the basis of any prior art or 
documentary evidence cited under paragraph (1) or (3) 
of subsection (a) of section 301 of this title.’’. 
(e) CONDUCT OF INTER PARTES PROCEEDINGS.— 
Section 314 of title 35, United States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first sentence of subsection (a), by 
striking ‘‘conducted according to the procedures es-
tablished for initial examination under the provisions 
of sections 132 and 133’’ and inserting ‘‘heard by 
an administrative patent judge in accordance with 
procedures which the Director shall establish’’; 
(2) in subsection (b), by striking paragraph (2) 
and inserting the following: 
‘‘(2) The third-party requester shall have the oppor-
tunity to file written comments on any action on the mer-
its by the Office in the inter partes reexamination pro-
ceeding, and on any response that the patent owner files 
to such an action, if those written comments are received 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
by the Office within 60 days after the date of service on 
the third-party requester of the Office action or patent 
owner response, as the case may be.’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(d) ORAL HEARING.—At the request of a third 
party requestor or the patent owner, the administrative 
patent judge shall conduct an oral hearing, unless the 
judge finds cause lacking for such hearing.’’. 
(f) ESTOPPEL.—Section 315(c) of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended by striking ‘‘or could have 
raised’’. 
(g) REEXAMINATION PROHIBITED AFTER DISTRICT 
COURT DECISION.—Section 317(b) of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the subsection heading, by striking 
‘‘FINAL DECISION’’ and inserting ‘‘DISTRICT COURT 
DECISION’’; and 
(2) by striking ‘‘Once a final decision has been 
entered’’ and inserting ‘‘Once the judgment of the 
district court has been entered’’. 
(h) POST-GRANT OPPOSITION PROCEDURES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—Part III of title 35, United 
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
following new chapter: 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘CHAPTER 32—POST-GRANT REVIEW 
PROCEDURES 
‘‘Sec. 
‘‘321. Petition for post-grant review. 
‘‘322. Timing and bases of petition. 
‘‘323. Requirements of petition. 
‘‘324. Prohibited filings. 
‘‘325. Submission of additional information; showing of sufficient grounds. 
‘‘326. Conduct of post-grant review proceedings. 
‘‘327. Patent owner response. 
‘‘328. Proof and evidentiary standards. 
‘‘329. Amendment of the patent. 
‘‘330. Decision of the Board. 
‘‘331. Effect of decision. 
‘‘332. Settlement. 
‘‘333. Relationship to other pending proceedings. 
‘‘334. Effect of decisions rendered in civil action on post-grant review pro-
ceedings. 
‘‘335. Effect of final decision on future proceedings. 
‘‘336. Appeal. 
‘‘§ 321. Petition for post-grant review 
‘‘Subject to sections 322, 324, 332, and 333, a per-
son who is not the patent owner may file with the Office 
a petition for cancellation seeking to institute a post-grant 
review proceeding to cancel as unpatentable any claim of 
a patent on any ground that could be raised under para-
graph (2) or (3) of section 282(b) (relating to invalidity 
of the patent or any claim). The Director shall establish, 
by regulation, fees to be paid by the person requesting 
the proceeding, in such amounts as the Director deter-
mines to be reasonable. 
‘‘§ 322. Timing and bases of petition 
‘‘A post-grant proceeding may be instituted under 
this chapter pursuant to a cancellation petition filed under 
section 321 only if— 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘(1) the petition is filed not later than 12 
months after the issuance of the patent or a reissue 
patent, as the case may be; or 
‘‘(2) the patent owner consents in writing to the 
proceeding. 
‘‘§ 323. Requirements of petition 
‘‘A cancellation petition filed under section 321 may 
be considered only if— 
‘‘(1) the petition is accompanied by payment of 
the fee established by the Director under section 
321; 
‘‘(2) the petition identifies the cancellation peti-
tioner; 
‘‘(3) for each claim sought to be canceled, the 
petition sets forth in writing the basis for cancella-
tion and provides the evidence in support thereof, in-
cluding copies of patents and printed publications, 
or written testimony of a witness attested to under 
oath or declaration by the witness, or any other in-
formation that the Director may require by regula-
tion; and 
‘‘(4) the petitioner provides copies of the peti-
tion, including any evidence submitted with the peti-
tion and any other information submitted under 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
paragraph (3), to the patent owner or, if applicable, 
the designated representative of the patent owner. 
‘‘§ 324. Prohibited filings 
‘‘A post-grant review proceeding may not be insti-
tuted under section 322 if the petition for cancellation re-
questing the proceeding— 
‘‘(1) identifies the same cancellation petitioner 
and the same patent as a previous petition for can-
cellation filed under such section; or 
‘‘(2) is based on the best mode requirement 
contained in section 112. 
‘‘§ 325. Submission of additional information; show-
ing of sufficient grounds 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The cancellation petitioner shall 
file such additional information with respect to the peti-
tion as the Director may require. For each petition sub-
mitted under section 321, the Director shall determine if 
the written statement, and any evidence submitted with 
the request, establish that a substantial question of pat-
entability exists for at least one claim in the patent. The 
Director may initiate a post-grant review proceeding if the 
Director determines that the information presented pro-
vides sufficient grounds to believe that there is a substan-
tial question of patentability concerning one or more 
claims of the patent at issue. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘(b) NOTIFICATION; DETERMINATIONS NOT RE-
VIEWABLE.—The Director shall notify the patent owner 
and each petitioner in writing of the Director’s determina-
tion under subsection (a), including a determination to 
deny the petition. The Director shall make that determina-
tion in writing not later than 60 days after receiving the 
petition. Any determination made by the Director under 
subsection (a), including whether or not to institute a 
post-grant review proceeding or to deny the petition, shall 
not be reviewable. 
‘‘§ 326. Conduct of post-grant review proceedings 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall prescribe reg-
ulations, in accordance with section 2(b)(2)— 
‘‘(1) establishing and governing post-grant re-
view proceedings under this chapter and their rela-
tionship to other proceedings under this title; 
‘‘(2) establishing procedures for the submission 
of supplemental information after the petition for 
cancellation is filed; and 
‘‘(3) setting forth procedures for discovery of 
relevant evidence, including that such discovery shall 
be limited to evidence directly related to factual as-
sertions advanced by either party in the proceeding, 
and the procedures for obtaining such evidence shall 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
be consistent with the purpose and nature of the 
proceeding. 
In carrying out paragraph (3), the Director shall bear in 
mind that discovery must be in the interests of justice. 
‘‘(b) 
POST-GRANT
REGULATIONS.—Regulations 
under subsection (a)(1)— 
‘‘(1) shall require that the final determination 
in a post-grant proceeding issue not later than one 
year after the date on which the post-grant review 
proceeding is instituted under this chapter, except 
that, for good cause shown, the Director may extend 
the 1-year period by not more than six months; 
‘‘(2) shall provide for discovery upon order of 
the Director; 
‘‘(3) shall provide for publication of notice in 
the Federal Register of the filing of a petition for 
post-grant review under this chapter, for publication 
of the petition, and documents, orders, and decisions 
relating to the petition, on the website of the Patent 
and Trademark Office, and for filings under seal ex-
empt from publication requirements; 
‘‘(4) shall prescribe sanctions for abuse of dis-
covery, abuse of process, or any other improper use 
of the proceeding, such as to harass or to cause un-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
necessary delay or unnecessary increase in the cost 
of the proceeding; 
‘‘(5) may provide for protective orders gov-
erning the exchange and submission of confidential 
information; and 
‘‘(6) shall ensure that any information sub-
mitted by the patent owner in support of any 
amendment entered under section 329 is made avail-
able to the public as part of the prosecution history 
of the patent. 
‘‘(c) CONSIDERATIONS.—In prescribing regulations 
under this section, the Director shall consider the effect 
on the economy, the integrity of the patent system, and 
the efficient administration of the Office. 
‘‘(d) CONDUCT OF PROCEEDING.—The Patent Trial 
and Appeal Board shall, in accordance with section 6(b), 
conduct each post-grant review proceeding authorized by 
the Director. 
‘‘§ 327. Patent owner response 
‘‘After a post-grant proceeding under this chapter 
has been instituted with respect to a patent, the patent 
owner shall have the right to file, within a time period 
set by the Director, a response to the cancellation petition. 
The patent owner shall file with the response, through af-
fidavits or declarations, any additional factual evidence 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘§ 336. Appeal 
‘‘A party dissatisfied with the final determination of 
the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in a post-grant pro-
ceeding under this chapter may appeal the determination 
under sections 141 through 144. Any party to the post- 
grant proceeding shall have the right to be a party to the 
appeal.’’. 
(i) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of chap-
ters for part III of title 35, United States Code, is amend-
ed by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘32. Post-Grant Review Proceedings .........................................
321’’. 
(j) REPEAL.—Section 4607 of the Intellectual Prop-
erty and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999, 
as enacted by section 1000(a)(9) of Public Law 106–113, 
is repealed. 
(k) EFFECTIVE DATES.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The amendments and repeal 
made by this section shall take effect at the end of 
the 1-year period beginning on the date of the enact-
ment of this Act. 
(2) APPLICABILITY TO EX PARTE AND INTER 
PARTES PROCEEDINGS.—Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, sections 301 and 311 through 318 
of title 35, United States Code, as amended by this 
section, shall apply to any patent that issues before, 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
on, or after the effective date under paragraph (1) 
from an original application filed on any date. 
(3) 
APPLICABILITY
TO
POST-GRANT
PRO-
CEEDINGS.—The amendments made by subsections 
(h) and (i) shall apply to patents issued on or after 
the effective date under paragraph (1). 
(l) REGULATIONS.—The Under Secretary of Com-
merce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United 
States Patent and Trademark Office (in this subsection 
referred to as the ‘‘Director’’) shall, not later than the 
date that is 1 year after the date of the enactment of this 
Act, issue regulations to carry out chapter 32 of title 35, 
United States Code, as added by subsection (h) of this 
section. 
SEC. 7. DEFINITIONS; PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. 
(a) DEFINITIONS.—Section 100 of title 35, United 
States Code (as amended by section 3 of this Act), is fur-
ther amended— 
(1) in subsection (e), by striking ‘‘or inter 
partes reexamination under section 311’’; and 
(2) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(k) The term ‘cancellation petitioner’ means the real 
party in interest requesting cancellation of any claim of 
a patent under chapter 31 of this title and the privies of 
the real party in interest.’’. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(b) PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD.—Section 6 
of title 35, United States Code, is amended to read as 
follows: 
‘‘§ 6. Patent Trial and Appeal Board 
‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT
AND COMPOSITION.—There 
shall be in the Office a Patent Trial and Appeal Board. 
The Director, the Deputy Director, the Commissioner for 
Patents, the Commissioner for Trademarks, and the ad-
ministrative patent judges shall constitute the Patent 
Trial and Appeal Board. The administrative patent judges 
shall be persons of competent legal knowledge and sci-
entific ability who are appointed by the Secretary of Com-
merce. Any reference in any Federal law, Executive order, 
rule, regulation, or delegation of authority, or any docu-
ment of or pertaining to the Board of Patent Appeals and 
Interferences is deemed to refer to the Patent Trial and 
Appeal Board. 
‘‘(b) DUTIES.—The Patent Trial and Appeal Board 
shall— 
‘‘(1) on written appeal of an applicant, review 
adverse decisions of examiners upon application for 
patents; 
‘‘(2) on written appeal of a patent owner, re-
view adverse decisions of examiners upon patents in 
reexamination proceedings under chapter 30; 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘(3) conduct derivation proceedings under sub-
section 135(a); and 
‘‘(4) conduct post-grant opposition proceedings 
under chapter 32. 
Each appeal and derivation proceeding shall be heard by 
at least 3 members of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, 
who shall be designated by the Director. Only the Patent 
Trial and Appeal Board may grant rehearings. The Direc-
tor shall assign each post-grant review proceeding to a 
panel of 3 administrative patent judges. Once assigned, 
each such panel of administrative patent judges shall have 
the responsibilities under chapter 32 in connection with 
post-grant review proceedings.’’. 
SEC. 8. STUDY AND REPORT ON REEXAMINATION PRO-
CEEDINGS. 
The Director shall, not later than 2 years after the 
date of the enactment of this Act— 
(1) conduct a study of the effectiveness and ef-
ficiency of the different forms of proceedings avail-
able under title 35, United States Code, for the re-
examination of patents; and 
(2) 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 re-
sults of the study, including any of the Director’s 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
suggestions for amending the law, and any other 
recommendations the Director has with respect to 
patent reexamination proceedings. 
SEC. 9. PREISSUANCE SUBMISSIONS BY THIRD PARTIES. 
Section 122 of title 35, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(e) PREISSUANCE SUBMISSIONS
BY THIRD PAR-
TIES.— 
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Any person may submit for 
consideration and inclusion in the record of a patent 
application, any patent, published patent application, 
or other publication of potential relevance to the ex-
amination of the application, if such submission is 
made in writing before the earlier of— 
‘‘(A) the date a notice of allowance under 
section 151 is mailed in the application for pat-
ent; or 
‘‘(B) either— 
‘‘(i) 6 months after the date on which 
the application for patent is published 
under section 122, or 
‘‘(ii) the date of the first rejection 
under section 132 of any claim by the ex-
aminer during the examination of the ap-
plication for patent, 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
whichever occurs later. 
‘‘(2) OTHER REQUIREMENTS.—Any submission 
under paragraph (1) shall— 
‘‘(A) set forth a concise description of the 
asserted relevance of each submitted document; 
‘‘(B) be accompanied by such fee as the 
Director may prescribe; 
‘‘(C) include a statement by the person 
making such submission affirming that the sub-
mission was made in compliance with this sec-
tion; and 
‘‘(D) identify the real party-in-interest 
making the submission.’’. 
SEC. 10. VENUE AND JURISDICTION. 
(a) VENUE FOR PATENT CASES.—Section 1400 of 
title 28, United States Code, is amended by striking sub-
section (b) and inserting the following: 
‘‘(b) Notwithstanding section 1391 of this title, in 
any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating 
to patents, a party shall not manufacture venue by assign-
ment, incorporation, or otherwise to invoke the venue of 
a specific district court. 
‘‘(c) Notwithstanding section 1391 of this title, any 
civil action for patent infringement or any action for de-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘(iii) serves as the patent and licens-
ing organization for an institution of high-
er education as defined under section 
101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)); or 
‘‘(4) where the plaintiff resides, if the sole 
plaintiff in the action is an individual inventor who 
is a natural person and who qualifies at the time 
such action is filed as a micro-entity pursuant to 
section 123 of title 35. 
‘‘(d) If a plaintiff brings a civil action for patent in-
fringement or declaratory judgment relief under sub-
section (c), then the defendant may request the district 
court to transfer that action to another district or division 
where, in the court’s determination— 
‘‘(1) any of the parties has substantial evidence 
or witnesses that otherwise would present consider-
able evidentiary burdens to the defendant if such 
transfer were not granted; 
‘‘(2) such transfer would not cause undue hard-
ship to the plaintiff; and 
‘‘(3) venue would be otherwise appropriate 
under section 1391 of this title.’’. 
(b) INTERLOCUTORY APPEALS.—Subsection (c) of 
section 1292 of title 28, United States Code, is amended— 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph 
(1); 
(2) by striking the period at the end of para-
graph (2) and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 
(3) by adding at the end the following: 
‘‘(3) of an appeal from an interlocutory order 
or decree determining construction of claims in a 
civil action for patent infringement under section 
271 of title 35. 
Application for an appeal under paragraph (3) shall be 
made to the court within 10 days after entry of the order 
or decree. The district court shall have discretion whether 
to approve the application and, if so, whether to stay pro-
ceedings in the district court during pendency of the ap-
peal.’’. 
(c) 
TECHNICAL
AMENDMENTS
RELATING
TO 
VENUE.—Sections 32, 145, 146, 154(b)(4)(A), and 293 
of title 35, United States Code, and section 21(b)(4) of 
the Act entitled ‘‘An Act to provide for the registration 
and protection of trademarks used in commerce, to carry 
out the provisions of certain international conventions, 
and for other purposes’’, approved July 5, 1946 (com-
monly referred to as the ‘‘Trademark Act of 1946’’ or the 
‘‘Lanham Act’’ (15 U.S.C. 1071(b)(4)), are each amended 
by striking ‘‘United States District Court for the District 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
of Columbia’’ each place that term appears and inserting 
‘‘United States District Court for the Eastern District of 
Virginia’’. 
SEC. 11. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGULATORY 
AUTHORITY. 
(a) FEE SETTING.— 
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall have au-
thority to set or adjust by rule any fee established 
or charged by the Office under sections 41 and 376 
of title 35, United States Code or under section 31 
of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15 U.S.C. 1113) for 
the filing or processing of any submission to, and for 
all other services performed by or materials fur-
nished by, the Office, provided that such fee 
amounts are set to reasonably compensate the Office 
for the services performed. 
(2) REDUCTION OF FEES IN CERTAIN FISCAL 
YEARS.—In any fiscal year, the Director— 
(A) shall consult with the Patent Public 
Advisory Committee and the Trademark Public 
Advisory Committee on the advisability of re-
ducing any fees described in paragraph (1); and 
(B) after that consultation may reduce 
such fees. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(3) ROLE
OF
THE
PUBLIC
ADVISORY
COM-
MITTEE.—The Director shall— 
(A) submit to the Patent or Trademark 
Public Advisory Committee, or both, as appro-
priate, any proposed fee under paragraph (1) 
not less than 45 days before publishing any 
proposed fee in the Federal Register; 
(B) provide the relevant advisory com-
mittee described in subparagraph (A) a 30-day 
period following the submission of any proposed 
fee, on which to deliberate, consider, and com-
ment on such proposal, and require that— 
(i) during such 30-day period, the rel-
evant advisory committee hold a public 
hearing related to such proposal; and 
(ii) the Director shall assist the rel-
evant advisory committee in carrying out 
such public hearing, including by offering 
the use of Office resources to notify and 
promote the hearing to the public and in-
terested stakeholders; 
(C) require the relevant advisory com-
mittee to make available to the public a written 
report detailing the comments, advice, and rec-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
ommendations of the committee regarding any 
proposed fee; 
(D) consider and analyze any comments, 
advice, or recommendations received from the 
relevant advisory committee before setting or 
adjusting any fee; and 
(E) notify, through the Chair and Ranking 
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary of 
the House of Representatives and the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary of the Senate, the Con-
gress of any final decision regarding proposed 
fees. 
(4) PUBLICATION
IN
THE
FEDERAL
REG-
ISTER.— 
(A) IN
GENERAL.—Any rules prescribed 
under this subsection shall be published in the 
Federal Register. 
(B) RATIONALE.—Any proposal for a 
change in fees under this section shall— 
(i) be published in the Federal Reg-
ister; and 
(ii) include, in such publication, the 
specific rationale and purpose for the pro-
posal, including the possible expectations 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
or benefits resulting from the proposed 
change. 
(C) PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.—Following 
the publication of any proposed fee in the Fed-
eral Register pursuant to subparagraph (A), the 
Director shall seek public comment for a period 
of not less than 45 days. 
(5) CONGRESSIONAL COMMENT PERIOD.—Fol-
lowing the notification described in paragraph 
(3)(E), Congress shall have not more than 45 days 
to consider and comment on any proposed fee under 
paragraph (1). No proposed fee shall be effective 
prior to the end of such 45-day comment period. 
(6) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—No rules pre-
scribed under this subsection may diminish— 
(A) an applicant’s rights under this title or 
the Trademark Act of 1946; or 
(B) any rights under a ratified treaty. 
(b) FEES FOR PATENT SERVICES.—Division B of 
Public Law 108–447 is amended in title VIII of the De-
partments of Commerce, Justice and State, the Judiciary, 
and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005, in section 
801(a) by striking ‘‘During fiscal years 2005, 2006 and 
2007’’, and inserting ‘‘Until such time as the Director sets 
or adjusts the fees otherwise,’’. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(c) ADJUSTMENT OF TRADEMARK FEES.—Division 
B of Public Law 108–447 is amended in title VIII of the 
Departments of Commerce, Justice and State, the Judici-
ary and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2005, in 
section 802(a) by striking ‘‘During fiscal years 2005, 
2006 and 2007’’, and inserting ‘‘Until such time as the 
Director sets or adjusts the fees otherwise,’’. 
(d) EFFECTIVE DATE, APPLICABILITY, AND TRANSI-
TIONAL PROVISION.—Division B of Public Law 108–447 
is amended in title VIII of the Departments of Commerce, 
Justice and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Ap-
propriations Act, 2005, in section 803(a) by striking ‘‘and 
shall apply only with respect to the remaining portion of 
fiscal year 2005, 2006 and 2007.’’. 
(e) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this sec-
tion shall be construed to affect any other provision of Di-
vision B of Public Law 108–447, including section 801(c) 
of title VII of the Departments of Commerce, Justice and 
State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriations 
Act, 2005. 
(f) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 
(1) DIRECTOR.—The term ‘‘Director’’ means 
the Director of the United States Patent and Trade-
mark Office. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(2) OFFICE.—The term ‘‘Office’’ means the 
United States Patent and Trademark Office. 
(3) TRADEMARK
ACT
OF
1946.—The term 
‘‘Trademark Act of 1946’’ means an Act entitled 
‘‘Act to provide for the registration and protection 
of trademarks used in commerce, to carry out the 
provisions of certain international conventions, and 
for other purposes’’, approved July 5, 1946 (15 
U.S.C. 1051 et seq.) (commonly referred to as the 
Trademark Act of 1946 or the Lanham Act). 
SEC. 12. RESIDENCY OF FEDERAL CIRCUIT JUDGES. 
Section 44(c) of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by striking the second sentence. 
SEC. 13. MICRO-ENTITY DEFINED. 
Chapter 11 of title 35, United States Code, is amend-
ed by adding at the end the following new section: 
‘‘§ 123. Micro-entity defined 
‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this title, the 
term ‘micro-entity’ means an applicant who makes a cer-
tification under either subsections (b) or (c). 
‘‘(b) UNASSIGNED
APPLICATION.—For an unas-
signed application, each applicant shall certify that the ap-
plicant— 
‘‘(1) qualifies as a small entity, as defined in 
regulations issued by the Director; 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
‘‘(2) has not been named on 5 or more pre-
viously filed patent applications; 
‘‘(3) has not assigned, granted, or conveyed, 
and is not under an obligation by contract or law to 
assign, grant, or convey, a license or any other own-
ership interest in the particular application; and 
‘‘(4) does not have a gross income, as defined 
in section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code, ex-
ceeding 2.5 times the median household income, as 
reported by the Bureau of the Census, in the cal-
endar year immediately preceding the calendar year 
in which the examination fee is being paid. 
‘‘(c) ASSIGNED APPLICATION.—For an assigned ap-
plication, each applicant shall certify that the applicant— 
‘‘(1) qualifies as a small entity, as defined in 
regulations issued by the Director, and meets the re-
quirements of subsection (b)(4); 
‘‘(2) has not been named on 5 or more pre-
viously filed patent applications; and 
‘‘(3) has assigned, granted, conveyed, or is 
under an obligation by contract or law to assign, 
grant, or convey, a license or other ownership inter-
est in the particular application to an entity that has 
5 or fewer employees and that such entity has a 
gross income, as defined in section 61(a) of the In-
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
ternal Revenue Code, that does not exceed 2.5 times 
the median household income, as reported by the 
Bureau of the Census, in the calendar year imme-
diately preceding the calendar year in which the ex-
amination fee is being paid. 
‘‘(d) INCOME LEVEL ADJUSTMENT.—The gross in-
come levels established under subsections (b) and (c) shall 
be adjusted by the Director on October 1, 2009, and every 
year thereafter, to reflect any fluctuations occurring dur-
ing the previous 12 months in the Consumer Price Index, 
as determined by the Secretary of Labor.’’. 
SEC. 14. TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS. 
(a) JOINT INVENTIONS.—Section 116 of title 35, 
United States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first paragraph, by striking 
‘‘When’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) JOINT
INVEN-
TIONS.—When’’; 
(2) in the second paragraph, by striking 
‘‘If a joint inventor’’ and inserting ‘‘(b) OMIT-
TED INVENTOR.—If a joint inventor’’; and 
(3) in the third paragraph, by striking 
‘‘Whenever’’ and inserting ‘‘(c) CORRECTION OF 
ERRORS IN APPLICATION.—Whenever’’. 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(b) FILING
OF APPLICATION
IN FOREIGN COUN-
TRY.—Section 184 of title 35, United States Code, is 
amended— 
(1) in the first paragraph, by striking ‘‘Except 
when’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) FILING
IN
FOREIGN 
COUNTRY.—Except when’’; 
(2) in the second paragraph, by striking ‘‘The 
term’’ 
and 
inserting 
‘‘(b) 
APPLICATION.—The 
term’’; and 
(3) in the third paragraph, by striking ‘‘The 
scope’’ and inserting ‘‘(c) SUBSEQUENT MODIFICA-
TIONS, AMENDMENTS, AND
SUPPLEMENTS.—The 
scope’’. 
(c) REISSUE OF DEFECTIVE PATENTS.—Section 251 
of title 35, United States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first paragraph, by striking ‘‘When-
ever’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever’’; 
(2) in the second paragraph, by striking ‘‘The 
Director’’ and inserting ‘‘(b) MULTIPLE REISSUED 
PATENTS.—The Director’’; 
(3) in the third paragraph, by striking ‘‘The 
provision’’ and inserting ‘‘(c) APPLICABILITY
OF 
THIS TITLE.—The provisions’’; and 
(4) in the last paragraph, by striking ‘‘No re-
issued patent’’ and inserting ‘‘(d) REISSUE PATENT 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
ENLARGING SCOPE OF CLAIMS.—No reissued pat-
ent’’. 
(d) EFFECT OF REISSUE.—Section 253 of title 35, 
United States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first paragraph, by striking ‘‘When-
ever’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—Whenever’’; 
and 
(2) in the second paragraph, by striking ‘‘in 
like manner’’ and inserting ‘‘(b) ADDITIONAL DIS-
CLAIMER OR DEDICATION.—In the manner set forth 
in subsection (a),’’. 
(e) CORRECTION
OF NAMED INVENTOR.—Section 
256 of title 35, United States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first paragraph, by striking ‘‘When-
ever’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) CORRECTION.—Whenever’’; 
and 
(2) in the second paragraph, by striking ‘‘The 
error’’ and inserting ‘‘(b) PATENT VALID IF ERROR 
CORRECTED.—The error’’. 
(f) PRESUMPTION OF VALIDITY.—Section 282 of title 
35, United States Code, is amended— 
(1) in the first undesignated paragraph, by 
striking ‘‘A patent’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) IN GEN-
ERAL.—A patent’’; 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(2) in the second undesignated paragraph, by 
striking ‘‘The following’’ and inserting ‘‘(b) DE-
FENSES.—The following’’; and 
(3) in the third undesignated paragraph, by 
striking ‘‘In actions’’ and inserting ‘‘(c) NOTICE OF 
ACTIONS; ACTIONS DURING EXTENSION OF PATENT 
TERM.—In actions’’. 
SEC. 15. EFFECTIVE DATE; RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. 
(a) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Except as otherwise provided 
in this Act, this Act and the amendments made by this 
Act shall take effect upon the expiration of the 12 month 
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act 
and shall apply to any patent issued on or after that effec-
tive date. 
(b) CONTINUITY OF INTENT UNDER THE CREATE 
ACT.—The enactment of section 102(b)(3) of title 35, 
United States Code, under section 3(b) of this Act is done 
with the same intent to promote joint research activities 
that was expressed, including in the legislative history, 
through the enactment of the Cooperative Research and 
Technology Enhancement Act of 2004 (Public Law 108– 
453; the ‘‘CREATE Act’’), the amendments of which are 
stricken by section 3(c) of this Act. The United States 
Patent and Trademark Office shall administer section 
102(b)(3) of title 35, United States Code, in a manner 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
consistent with the legislative history of the CREATE Act 
that was relevant to its administration by the United 
States Patent and Trademark Office. 
SEC. 16. STUDY OF SPECIAL MASTERS IN PATENT CASES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the 
date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of the Ad-
ministrative Office of the United States Courts shall con-
duct a study of, and submit to the Committee on the Judi-
ciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
on the Judiciary of the Senate a report on, the use of 
special masters in patent litigation who are appointed in 
accordance with Rule 53 of the Federal Rules of Civil Pro-
cedure. 
(b) OBJECTIVE.—In conducting the study under sub-
section (a), the Director of the Administrative Office of 
the United States Courts shall consider whether the use 
of special masters has been beneficial in patent litigation 
and what, if any, program should be undertaken to facili-
tate the use by the judiciary of special masters in patent 
litigation. 
(c) FACTORS TO CONSIDER.—In conducting the 
study under subsection (a), the Director, in consultation 
with the Federal Judicial Center, shall consider— 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
(1) the basis upon which courts appoint special 
masters under Rule 53(b) of the Federal Rules of 
Civil Procedure; 
(2) the frequency with which special masters 
have been used by the courts; 
(3) the role and powers special masters are 
given by the courts; 
(4) the subject matter at issue in cases that use 
special masters; 
(5) the impact on court time and costs in cases 
where a special master is used as compared to cases 
where no special master is used; 
(6) the legal and technical training and experi-
ence of special masters; 
(7) whether the use of special masters has an 
impact on the reversal rate of district court decisions 
at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit; and 
(8) any other factors that the Director believes 
would assist in gauging the effectiveness of special 
masters in patent litigation. 
SEC. 17. STUDY ON WORKPLACE CONDITIONS. 
The Comptroller General shall, not later than 2 years 
after the date of the enactment of this Act— 
(1) conduct a study of workplace conditions for 
the examiner corps of the United States Patent and 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
Trademark Office, including the effect, if any, of 
this Act and the amendments made by this Act on— 
(A) recruitment, retention, and promotion 
of employees; and 
(B) workload, quality assurance, and em-
ployee grievances; and 
(2) 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 re-
sults of the study, including any suggestions for im-
proving workplace conditions, together with any 
other recommendations that the Comptroller General 
has with respect to patent reexamination pro-
ceedings. 
SEC. 18. STUDY ON PATENT DAMAGES. 
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director shall conduct a 
study of patent damage awards in cases where such 
awards have been based on a reasonable royalty under sec-
tion 284 of title 35, United States Code. The study should, 
at a minimum, consider cases from 1990 to the present. 
(b) CONDUCT.—In conducting the study under sub-
section (a), the Director shall investigate, at a minimum, 
the following: 
(1) Whether the mean or median dollar amount 
of reasonable-royalty-based patent damages awarded 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
by courts or juries, as the case may be, has signifi-
cantly increased on a per case basis during the pe-
riod covered by the study, taking into consideration 
adjustments for inflation and other relevant eco-
nomic factors. 
(2) Whether there has been a pattern of exces-
sive and inequitable reasonable-royalty-based dam-
ages during the period covered by the study and, if 
so, any contributing factors, including, for example, 
evidence that Federal courts have routinely and in-
appropriately broadened the scope of the ‘‘entire 
market value rule’’, or that juries have routinely 
misapplied the entire market value rule to the facts 
at issue. 
(3) To the extent that a pattern of excessive 
and inequitable damage awards exists, measures 
that could guard against such inappropriate awards 
without unduly prejudicing the rights and remedies 
of patent holders or significantly increasing litigation 
costs, including legislative reforms or improved 
model jury instructions. 
(4) To the extent that a pattern of excessive 
and inequitable damage awards exists, whether legis-
lative proposals that would mandate, or create a pre-
sumption in favor of, apportionment of reasonable- 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6201
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS
royalty-based patent damages would effectively 
guard against such inappropriate awards without 
unduly prejudicing the rights and remedies of patent 
holders or significantly increasing litigation costs. 
(c) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date 
of the enactment of this Act, the Director shall submit 
to the Congress a report on the study conducted under 
this section. 
SEC. 19. SEVERABILITY. 
If any provision of this Act or of any amendment or 
repeals made by this Act, or the application of such a pro-
vision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid 
or unenforceable, the remainder of this Act and the 
amendments and repeals made by this Act, and the appli-
cation of this Act and such amendments and repeals to 
any other person or circumstance, shall not be affected 
by such holding. 
Æ 
VerDate Nov 24 2008 
01:22 Mar 05, 2009
Jkt 079200
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 6652
Sfmt 6301
E:\BILLS\H1260.IH
H1260
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with BILLS