To establish a pilot program in certain United States district courts to encourage enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges.

Bill: 109-hr-5418
Sponsor: Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49]
Introduced: 2006-05-18 in the House
Policy area: Law
Subjects: Agriculture and Food
Congressional reporting requirements
Continuing education
District courts
Education
Governmental investigations
Higher education
Intellectual property
Judges
Judicial officers
Legal education
Patents
Plant breeding
Pretrial procedure
Seeds

Summary:
action_date: 2006-05-18
text: 
Establishes a pilot program in certain U.S. district courts under which: (1) those district judges who request to hear cases involving patent or plant variety protection issues are designated by the chief judge to hear them; (2) such cases are randomly assigned to the district court judges, regardless of whether they are designated; (3) a judge not designated to whom such a case is assigned may decline to accept the case; and (4) a case so declined is randomly reassigned to one of those judges so designated. 

action_date: 2006-09-21
text: 
Establishes a 10-year pilot program in certain U.S. district courts under which: (1) those district judges who request to hear cases involving patent or plant variety protection issues are designated by the chief judge to hear them; (2) such cases are randomly assigned to the district court judges, regardless of whether they are designated; (3) a judge not designated to whom such a case is assigned may decline to accept the case; and (4) a case so declined is randomly reassigned to one of those judges so designated.
 
Requires the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to designate at least five U.S. district courts, in at least three different judicial circuits, to carry out the pilot program. Requires such courts to be among the 15 district courts in which the largest number of such cases were filed in the most recent calendar year. States that the Director may only designate a court in which: (1) at least 10 district judges are authorized for presidential appointment; and (2) at least three judges request such cases.
 
Requires periodic reports on the program to specified congressional committees.
 
Authorizes appropriations for: (1) educational and professional development of those district judges designated under this Act; and (2) compensation of law clerks with expertise in technical matters arising in patent and plant variety protection cases who are appointed to assist courts in such cases.

action_date: 2006-09-28
text: 

(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on September 21, 2006. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

 
Establishes a 10-year pilot program in certain U.S. district courts under which: (1) those district judges who request to hear cases involving patent or plant variety protection issues are designated by the chief judge to hear them; (2) such cases are randomly assigned to the district court judges, regardless of whether they are designated; (3) a judge not designated to whom such a case is assigned may decline to accept the case; and (4) a case so declined is randomly reassigned to one of those judges so designated.
 
Requires the Director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to designate at least five U.S. district courts, in at least three different judicial circuits, to carry out the pilot program. Requires such courts to be among the 15 district courts in which the largest number of such cases were filed in the most recent calendar year. States that the Director may only designate a court in which: (1) at least 10 district judges are authorized for presidential appointment; and (2) at least three judges request such cases.
 
Requires periodic reports on the program to specified congressional committees.
 
Authorizes appropriations for: (1) educational and professional development of those district judges designated under this Act; and (2) compensation of law clerks with expertise in technical matters arising in patent and plant variety protection cases who are appointed to assist courts in such cases.


Legislative actions:
action_date: 2006-11-13
text: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
action_date: 2006-09-29
text: Received in the Senate.
action_date: 2006-09-28
text: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
action_date: 2006-09-28
text: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H7851)
action_date: 2006-09-28
text: Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7851)
action_date: 2006-09-28
text: DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5418.
action_date: 2006-09-28
text: Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7851-7853)
action_date: 2006-09-28
text: Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
action_date: 2006-09-21
text: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 402.
action_date: 2006-09-21
text: Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-673.
action_date: 2006-09-21
text: Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 109-673.
action_date: 2006-09-13
text: Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
action_date: 2006-09-13
text: Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
action_date: 2006-07-27
text: Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote .
action_date: 2006-07-27
text: Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
action_date: 2006-06-05
text: Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
action_date: 2006-05-18
text: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
action_date: 2006-05-18
text: Introduced in House
action_date: 2006-05-18
text: Introduced in House