dreamproit/uscode huggingface dataset:
35 U.S.C. § 289 (PATENTS)
§ 289. Additional remedy for infringement of design patent
Whoever during the term of a patent for a design, without license of the owner, (1) applies the patented design, or any colorable imitation thereof, to any article of manufacture for the purpose of sale, or (2) sells or exposes for sale any article of manufacture to which such design or colorable imitation has been applied shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit, but not less than $250, recoverable in any United States district court having jurisdiction of the parties.
Nothing in this section shall prevent, lessen, or impeach any other remedy which an owner of an infringed patent has under the provisions of this title, but he shall not twice recover the profit made from the infringement.
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 813.)
heading: Historical and Revision Notes
text: Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §§ 74, 75 (Feb. 4, 1887, ch. 105, §§ 1, 2, 24 Stat. 387, 388).
Language is changed.
35 U.S.C. § 290 (PATENTS)
§ 290. Notice of patent suits
The clerks of the courts of the United States, within one month after the filing of an action under this title shall give notice thereof in writing to the Director, setting forth so far as known the names and addresses of the parties, name of the inventor, and the designating number of the patent upon which the action has been brought. If any other patent is subsequently included in the action he shall give like notice thereof. Within one month after the decision is rendered or a judgment issued the clerk of the court shall give notice thereof to the Director. The Director shall, on receipt of such notices, enter the same in the file of such patent.
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 814; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906.)
heading: Historical and Revision Notes
text: Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., § 70, part (R.S. 4921, amended (1) Mar. 3, 1897, ch. 391, § 6, 29 Stat. 694, (2) Feb. 18, 1922, ch. 58, § 8, 42 Stat. 392, (3) Aug. 1, 1946, ch. 726, § 1, 60 Stat. 778).
This is the last sentence of R.S. 4921, third paragraph, with minor changes in language.
heading: Amendments
text: 2002—Pub. L. 107–273 made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113. See 1999 Amendment note below.
1999—Pub. L. 106–113, as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, substituted “Director” for “Commissioner” wherever appearing.
heading: Effective Date of 1999 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 106–113 effective 4 months after Nov. 29, 1999, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4731] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 291 (PATENTS)
§ 291. Derived patents
(a) In General.—
The owner of a patent may have relief by civil action against the owner of another patent that claims the same invention and has an earlier effective filing date, if the invention claimed in such other patent was derived from the inventor of the invention claimed in the patent owned by the person seeking relief under this section.
(b) Filing Limitation.—
An action under this section may be filed only before the end of the 1-year period beginning on the date of the issuance of the first patent containing a claim to the allegedly derived invention and naming an individual alleged to have derived such invention as the inventor or joint inventor.
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 814; Pub. L. 112–29, §§ 3(h)(1), 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 288, 335.)
heading: Historical and Revision Notes
text: Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., § 66 (R.S. 4918, amended Mar. 2, 1927, ch. 273, § 12, 44 Stat. 1337).
Language is changed.
heading: Amendments
text: 2011—Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), struck out “of this title” after “146”.
Pub. L. 112–29, § 3(h)(1), amended section generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: “The owner of an interfering patent may have relief against the owner of another by civil action, and the court may adjudge the question of the validity of any of the interfering patents, in whole or in part. The provisions of the second paragraph of section 146 shall apply to actions brought under this section.”
heading: Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
text: Amendment by section 3(h)(1) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 18-month period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to certain applications for patent and any patents issuing thereon, see section 3(n) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment; Savings Provisions note under section 100 of this title.
Amendment by section 20(j) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.
heading: Savings Provisions
text: Provisions of 35 U.S.C. 291, as in effect on the day before the expiration of the 18-month period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, apply to each claim of certain applications for patent, and certain patents issued thereon, for which the amendments made by section 3 of Pub. L. 112–29 also apply, see section 3(n)(2) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment; Savings Provisions note under section 100 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 293 (PATENTS)
§ 293. Nonresident patentee; service and notice
Every patentee not residing in the United States may file in the Patent and Trademark Office a written designation stating the name and address of a person residing within the United States on whom may be served process or notice of proceedings affecting the patent or rights thereunder. If the person designated cannot be found at the address given in the last designation, or if no person has been designated, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia shall have jurisdiction and summons shall be served by publication or otherwise as the court directs. The court shall have the same jurisdiction to take any action respecting the patent or rights thereunder that it would have if the patentee were personally within the jurisdiction of the court.
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 814; Pub. L. 93–596, § 1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949; Pub. L. 112–29, § 9(a), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 316.)
heading: Historical and Revision Notes
text: This section provides for service on non-resident patentees.
heading: Amendments
text: 2011—Pub. L. 112–29 substituted “United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia” for “United States District Court for the District of Columbia”.
1975—Pub. L. 93–596 substituted “Patent and Trademark Office” for “Patent Office”.
heading: Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 112–29 effective Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to any civil action commenced on or after that date, see section 9(b) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 1071 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.
heading: Effective Date of 1975 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 93–596 effective Jan. 2, 1975, see section 4 of Pub. L. 93–596, set out as a note under section 1111 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.
35 U.S.C. § 295 (PATENTS)
§ 295. Presumption: Product made by patented process
In actions alleging infringement of a process patent based on the importation, sale, offer for sale, or use of a product which is made from a process patented in the United States, if the court finds—
(1) that a substantial likelihood exists that the product was made by the patented process, and
(2) that the plaintiff has made a reasonable effort to determine the process actually used in the production of the product and was unable to so determine,
the product shall be presumed to have been so made, and the burden of establishing that the product was not made by the process shall be on the party asserting that it was not so made.
(Added Pub. L. 100–418, title IX, § 9005(a), Aug. 23, 1988, 102 Stat. 1566; amended Pub. L. 103–465, title V, § 533(b)(7), Dec. 8, 1994, 108 Stat. 4990.)
heading: Amendments
text: 1994—Pub. L. 103–465 substituted “sale, offer for sale, or use” for “sale, or use” in introductory provisions.
heading: Effective Date of 1994 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 103–465 effective on date that is one year after date on which the WTO Agreement enters into force with respect to the United States [Jan. 1, 1995], with provisions relating to earliest filed patent application, see section 534(a), (b)(3) of Pub. L. 103–465, set out as a note under section 154 of this title.
heading: Effective Date
text: Section effective 6 months after Aug. 23, 1988, and, subject to enumerated exceptions, applicable only with respect to products made or imported after such effective date, see section 9006 of Pub. L. 100–418, set out as an Effective Date of 1988 Amendment note under section 271 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 296 (PATENTS)
§ 296. Liability of States, instrumentalities of States, and State officials for infringement of patents
(a) In General.—
Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his official capacity, shall not be immune, under the eleventh amendment of the Constitution of the United States or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal court by any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity, for infringement of a patent under section 271, or for any other violation under this title.
(b) Remedies.—
In a suit described in subsection (a) for a violation described in that subsection, remedies (including remedies both at law and in equity) are available for the violation to the same extent as such remedies are available for such a violation in a suit against any private entity. Such remedies include damages, interest, costs, and treble damages under section 284, attorney fees under section 285, and the additional remedy for infringement of design patents under section 289.
(Added Pub. L. 102–560, § 2(a)(2), Oct. 28, 1992, 106 Stat. 4230.)
heading: Constitutionality
text: For information regarding constitutionality of this section, as added by section 2(a)(2) of Pub. L. 102–560, see Congressional Research Service, The Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation, Appendix 1, Acts of Congress Held Unconstitutional in Whole or in Part by the Supreme Court of the United States.
heading: Effective Date
text: Section effective with respect to violations that occur on or after Oct. 28, 1992, see section 4 of Pub. L. 102–560, set out as an Effective Date of 1992 Amendment note under section 2541 of Title 7, Agriculture.
35 U.S.C. § 298 (PATENTS)
§ 298. Advice of counsel
The failure of an infringer to obtain the advice of counsel with respect to any allegedly infringed patent, or the failure of the infringer to present such advice to the court or jury, may not be used to prove that the accused infringer willfully infringed the patent or that the infringer intended to induce infringement of the patent.
(Added Pub. L. 112–29, § 17(a), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 329.)
heading: Effective Date
text: Pub. L. 112–274, § 1(a), Jan. 14, 2013, 126 Stat. 2456, provided that: “Notwithstanding section 35 of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act [Pub. L. 112–29] (35 U.S.C. 1 note), section 298 of title 35, United States Code, shall apply to any civil action commenced on or after the date of the enactment of this Act [Jan. 14, 2013].”
Except as otherwise provided in Pub. L. 112–29, section effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to any patent issued on or after that effective date, see section 35 of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment note under section 1 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 299 (PATENTS)
§ 299. Joinder of parties
(a) Joinder of Accused Infringers.—
With respect to any civil action arising under any Act of Congress relating to patents, other than an action or trial in which an act of infringement under section 271(e)(2) has been pled, parties that are accused infringers may be joined in one action as defendants or counterclaim defendants, or have their actions consolidated for trial, only if—
(1) any right to relief is asserted against the parties jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences relating to the making, using, importing into the United States, offering for sale, or selling of the same accused product or process; and
(2) questions of fact common to all defendants or counterclaim defendants will arise in the action.
(b) Allegations Insufficient for Joinder.—
For purposes of this subsection, accused infringers may not be joined in one action as defendants or counterclaim defendants, or have their actions consolidated for trial, based solely on allegations that they each have infringed the patent or patents in suit.
(c) Waiver.—
A party that is an accused infringer may waive the limitations set forth in this section with respect to that party.
(Added Pub. L. 112–29, § 19(d)(1), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 332; amended Pub. L. 112–274, § 1(c), Jan. 14, 2013, 126 Stat. 2456.)
heading: Amendments
text: 2013—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 112–274 substituted “only if” for “or counterclaim defendants only if” in introductory provisions.
heading: Effective Date of 2013 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 112–274 effective Jan. 14, 2013, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after such date, see section 1(n) of Pub. L. 112–274, set out as a note under section 5 of this title.
heading: Effective Date
text: Section applicable to any civil action commenced on or after Sept. 16, 2011, see section 19(e) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment note under section 1295 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.
35 U.S.C. § 302 (PATENTS)
§ 302. Request for reexamination
Any person at any time may file a request for reexamination by the Office of any claim of a patent on the basis of any prior art cited under the provisions of section 301. The request must be in writing and must be accompanied by payment of a reexamination fee established by the Director pursuant to the provisions of section 41. The request must set forth the pertinency and manner of applying cited prior art to every claim for which reexamination is requested. Unless the requesting person is the owner of the patent, the Director promptly will send a copy of the request to the owner of record of the patent.
(Added Pub. L. 96–517, § 1, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3015; amended Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(8), (10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906; Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 335.)
heading: Amendments
text: 2011—Pub. L. 112–29 struck out “of this title” after “301” and after “41”.
2002—Pub. L. 107–273 made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)]. See 1999 Amendment note below.
1999—Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)], as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, substituted “Director promptly” for “Commissioner promptly”.
Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(8)], substituted “Director pursuant” for “Commissioner of Patents pursuant”.
heading: Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.
heading: Effective Date of 1999 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 106–113 effective 4 months after Nov. 29, 1999, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4731] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 304 (PATENTS)
§ 304. Reexamination order by Director
If, in a determination made under the provisions of subsection 303(a), the Director finds that a substantial new question of patentability affecting any claim of a patent is raised, the determination will include an order for reexamination of the patent for resolution of the question. The patent owner will be given a reasonable period, not less than two months from the date a copy of the determination is given or mailed to him, within which he may file a statement on such question, including any amendment to his patent and new claim or claims he may wish to propose, for consideration in the reexamination. If the patent owner files such a statement, he promptly will serve a copy of it on the person who has requested reexamination under the provisions of section 302. Within a period of two months from the date of service, that person may file and have considered in the reexamination a reply to any statement filed by the patent owner. That person promptly will serve on the patent owner a copy of any reply filed.
(Added Pub. L. 96–517, § 1, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3016; amended Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906; Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 335.)
heading: Amendments
text: 2011—Pub. L. 112–29 struck out “of this title” after “303(a)” and after “302”.
2002—Pub. L. 107–273 made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113. See 1999 Amendment note below.
1999—Pub. L. 106–113, as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, substituted “Director” for “Commissioner” in section catchline and text.
heading: Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.
heading: Effective Date of 1999 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 106–113 effective 4 months after Nov. 29, 1999, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4731] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 305 (PATENTS)
§ 305. Conduct of reexamination proceedings
After the times for filing the statement and reply provided for by section 304 have expired, reexamination will be conducted according to the procedures established for initial examination under the provisions of sections 132 and 133. In any reexamination proceeding under this chapter, the patent owner will be permitted to propose any amendment to his patent and a new claim or claims thereto, in order to distinguish the invention as claimed from the prior art cited under the provisions of section 301, or in response to a decision adverse to the patentability of a claim of a patent. No proposed amended or new claim enlarging the scope of a claim of the patent will be permitted in a reexamination proceeding under this chapter. All reexamination proceedings under this section, including any appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, will be conducted with special dispatch within the Office.
(Added Pub. L. 96–517, § 1, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3016; amended Pub. L. 98–622, title II, § 204(c), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3388; Pub. L. 112–29, §§ 3(j)(1), 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 290, 335.)
heading: Amendments
text: 2011—Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), struck out “of this title” after “304”, after “133”, and after “301”.
Pub. L. 112–29, § 3(j)(1), substituted “Patent Trial and Appeal Board” for “Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences”.
1984—Pub. L. 98–622, § 204(c), substituted “Patent Appeals and Interferences” for “Appeals”.
heading: Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
text: Amendment by section 3(j)(1) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 18-month period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to certain applications for patent and any patents issuing thereon, see section 3(n) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment; Savings Provisions note under section 100 of this title.
Amendment by section 20(j) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.
heading: Effective Date of 1984 Amendment
text: Amendment by Pub. L. 98–622 effective three months after Nov. 8, 1984, see section 207 of Pub. L. 98–622, set out as a note under section 41 of this title.
35 U.S.C. § 306 (PATENTS)
§ 306. Appeal
The patent owner involved in a reexamination proceeding under this chapter may appeal under the provisions of section 134, and may seek court review under the provisions of sections 141 to 144, with respect to any decision adverse to the patentability of any original or proposed amended or new claim of the patent.
(Added Pub. L. 96–517, § 1, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3016; amended Pub. L. 112–29, §§ 6(h)(2)(A), 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 312, 335.)
heading: Amendments
text: 2011—Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), struck out “of this title” after “134” and after “144”.
Pub. L. 112–29, § 6(h)(2)(A), substituted “144” for “145”.
heading: Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
text: Pub. L. 112–29, § 6(h)(2)(B), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 312, provided that: “The amendment made by this paragraph [amending this section] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [Sept. 16, 2011] and shall apply to any appeal of a reexamination before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences or the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that is pending on, or brought on or after, the date of the enactment of this Act.”
Amendment by section 20(j) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.