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

Bill: 111-hr-628
Sponsor: Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49]
Introduced: 2009-01-22 in the House
Policy area: Law
Subjects: Federal district courts
Horticulture and plants
Intellectual property
Judges

Summary:
action_date: 2009-01-22
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: 2009-03-17
text: 

(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

 
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: 2010-12-13
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: 2011-01-04
text: 

(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on December 13, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

 
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.


Legislative actions:
action_date: 2011-01-04
text: Became Public Law No: 111-349.
action_date: 2011-01-04
text: Became Public Law No: 111-349.
action_date: 2011-01-04
text: Signed by President.
action_date: 2011-01-04
text: Signed by President.
action_date: 2010-12-28
text: Presented to President.
action_date: 2010-12-28
text: Presented to President.
action_date: 2010-12-17
text: Cleared for White House.
action_date: 2010-12-17
text: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
action_date: 2010-12-17
text: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 371 - 1 (Roll no. 651). (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 12/16/2010 H8536-8537)
action_date: 2010-12-17
text: Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 371 - 1 (Roll no. 651).(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 12/16/2010 H8536-8537)
action_date: 2010-12-17
text: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8762-8763)
action_date: 2010-12-16
text: At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Ms. Chu objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
action_date: 2010-12-16
text: DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the Senate amendment to H.R. 628.
action_date: 2010-12-16
text: Ms. Chu moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H8536-8539)
action_date: 2010-12-14
text: Message on Senate action sent to the House.
action_date: 2010-12-13
text: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
action_date: 2010-12-13
text: Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
action_date: 2010-12-13
text: Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S8946-8947)
action_date: 2010-12-13
text: Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
action_date: 2010-12-13
text: Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
action_date: 2009-03-18
text: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 409 - 7 (Roll no. 130). (text: CR H3456-3457)
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 409 - 7 (Roll no. 130).(text: CR H3456-3457)
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3471)
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Issa objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 628.
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3456-3459)
action_date: 2009-03-17
text: Mr. Johnson (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
action_date: 2009-01-22
text: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
action_date: 2009-01-22
text: Introduced in House
action_date: 2009-01-22
text: Introduced in House

Enacted as: number: 111-349