Source: http://www.techlawjournal.com/alert/2004/01/21.asp
Timestamp: 2019-04-20 10:45:18+00:00

Document:
TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 820, January 21, 2004.
January 21, 2004, 9:00 AM ET, Alert No. 820.
1/20. The SCO Group filed a complaint [11 pages in PDF] in state court in Utah against Novell alleging slander of title. The dispute involves intellectual property rights in the UNIX operating system. The complaint does not include a claim for copyright infringement. Nor does it plead any other cause of action that it alleges arises under the Copyright Act or the Patent Act.
The single count complaint alleges that "SCO is the sole and exclusive owner of all copyrights related to UNIX and UnixWare source code and all documentation and peripheral code and systems related thereto" and that "Novell has slandered SCO's title and rights to its UNIX and UnixWare copyrights and damaged SCO's business reputation and relationships with potential customers by making false oaths of ownership to public officials, and by repeatedly representing both to the public in general and directly to several of SCO's customers and potential customers that Novell, and not SCO, owns the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights".
On March 6, 2003 SCO (also known as Caldera) filed a complaint in state court in Utah against IBM alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, tortious interference, unfair competition and breach of contract in connection with IBM's alleged use of Caldera's proprietary UNIX code. That complaint did not assert copyright or patent infringement.
On May 28, 2003, Novell entered the fray. It wrote a letter to SCO, which it publicly released, in which it stated that "SCO continues to say that it owns the UNIX System V patents, yet it must know that it does not. A simple review of U.S. Patent Office records reveals that Novell owns those patents."
Novell added that "SCO is not the owner of the UNIX copyrights. Not only would a quick check of U.S. Copyright Office records reveal this fact, but a review of the asset transfer agreement between Novell and SCO confirms it. To Novell's knowledge, the 1995 agreement governing SCO's purchase of UNIX from Novell does not convey to SCO the associated copyrights. We believe it unlikely that SCO can demonstrate that it has any ownership interest whatsoever in those copyrights."
SCO's complaint against Novell alleges that "Through an Asset Purchase Agreement dated September 19, 1995 ... wherein Novell received 6.1 million shares of SCO common stock ... SCO, through its predecessor in interest, acquired from Novell all right, title, and interest in and to the UNIX and UnixWare business, operating system, source code, and all copyrights related thereto, as well as all claims arising after the closing date against any parties relating to any right, property, or asset including in the business."
SCO's complaint further alleges that "In a bad faith effort to interfere with SCO's exercise of its rights with respect to UNIX and UnixWare technologies, Novell has, in disregard of its obligations under the Asset Purchase Agreement, and subsequent to the Asset Purchase Agreement, filed for copyright protection in the same UNIX technology covered by SCO's copyrights."
SCO requests that the Court grant judgment "For actual and special damages in an amount to be proven at trial for Novell's slander of SCO's title to the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights" and "For punitive damages..."
SCO also requests a "preliminary and permanent injunction (a) requiring Novell to assign to SCO any and all copyrights Novell has registered in UNIX and UnixWare; (b) preventing Novell from representing in any forum that it has any ownership interest in the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights; and (c) requiring Novell to retract or withdraw all representations it has made regarding its purported ownership of the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights."
SCO is represented in this case by Brent Hatch of the Salt Lake City law firm of Hatch James & Dodge, and Steven Zack and Mark Heise of the law firm of Boies Schiller and Flexner.
Mark Heise stated in a release that "SCO takes this action today given Novell's recent and repeated announcements regarding their claimed ownership of the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights. SCO has received many questions about Novell's actions from potential customers, investors and the press. Although SCO owns the UNIX and UnixWare copyrights, Novell's efforts to claim ownership of these copyrights has forced this action".
Heise added that "We encourage the public and commercial Linux users to read the Asset Purchase Agreement from 1995 (including Attachment E found at www.sco.com/novell) and Amendment 2 so they can see for themselves that SCO owns the copyrights to UNIX and UnixWare."
This case is SCO Group, Inc. v. Novell, Inc., Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, State of Utah, Case No. 40900936, Judge Anthony Quinn presiding.
Northwest has stated that it did transfer the data to NASA. It issued a statement on January 18, 2003: "In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 tragedy, NASA had discussions with Northwest Airlines� Security Department regarding a NASA research study to improve aviation security. In December 2001, NASA requested that Northwest�s Security Department provide it with passenger name record data from the period July, August, and September 2001 for NASA�s exclusive use in its research study. Northwest Airlines agreed to provide that data."
Section 41712 provides that "On the initiative of the Secretary of Transportation or the complaint of an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent, and if the Secretary considers it is in the public interest, the Secretary may investigate and decide whether an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent has been or is engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice or an unfair method of competition in air transportation or the sale of air transportation. If the Secretary, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, finds that an air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent is engaged in an unfair or deceptive practice or unfair method of competition, the Secretary shall order the air carrier, foreign air carrier, or ticket agent to stop the practice or method."
The EPIC has filed administrative complaints in the past with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) arguing that violation of privacy policies constitutes unfair and deceptive trade practices within the meaning of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), which is codified at 15 U.S.C. � 45(a)(1).
The DOT has not yet enforced its statute in this manner. Marc Rotenberg and David Sobel of the EPIC held a telephone new conference on January 20, 2004. Sobel (at right) stated that EPIC hopes that the DOT will follow the precedent set by the FTC. He added that "this might be breaking new ground" at the DOT.
The EPIC obtained records from the NASA in response to request made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). These records, which are published in the EPIC's web site, demonstrate the transfer of data.
These records reflect that there was a meeting on December 10-11, 2001. One document, a presentation outline [20 pages in PDF] titled "NASA Ames Research Center: Northwest Airlines Briefing: December 10-11, 2001", contains NASA's explanation of what NASA intended to do with the passenger data.
� Addressing issue of scalability for national-scale system using IPG technology".
See also, story titled "Northwest Airlines Provided Passenger Data to NASA for Data Mining Study" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 819, January 20, 2003.
However, the NASA also withheld other documents from the EPIC. Rotenberg and Sobel stated at their news conference that the EPIC will also file a complaint in U.S. District Court against the NASA alleging violation of the FOIA in connection with its refusal to produce copies of certain records. Rotenberg added that other laws may have been violated by the NASA, since it is a government agency affected by the Privacy Act.
The EPIC has filed administrative complaints with the FTC in the past, similar to the present complaint against Northwest, regarding practices of JetBlue, Microsoft, and Intel. It has obtained considerable success in changing the business practices of the companies that it has targeted.
In July of 2001, the EPIC and others submitted a complaint to the FTC regarding Microsoft's Passport and other software and services. See, original complaint [PDF] of July 26, 2001, and updated complaint [PDF] of August 15, 2001. See also, stories titled "EPIC Complains about Microsoft Passport" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 250, August 16, 2001; "EPIC Seeks Government Investigations of Microsoft's Passport" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 357, January 30, 2002; and "EPIC Complains to FTC About Windows XP" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 236, July 27, 2002.
The FTC acted upon the EPIC's complaints. On August 8, 2002, the FTC brought and settled an administrative complaint against Microsoft. The complaint alleged that Microsoft "represented, expressly or by implication, that it maintained a high level of online security by employing sufficient measures reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances to maintain and protect the privacy and confidentiality of personal information obtained from or about consumers in connection with the Passport and Passport Wallet services", whereas, in fact, Microsoft "did not maintain a high level of online security ..."
The FTC and Microsoft simultaneously entered into an Agreement Containing Consent Order. Microsoft admitted to no violations of federal law. Microsoft paid no fine. However, the agreement, which has a twenty year duration, imposed numerous requirements for Microsoft's information security program. See, stories titled "FTC Files and Settles Complaint Against Microsoft", August 8, 2002, also published in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 488, August 9, 2002; and "EPIC Comments on FTC's Proposed Consent Order Affecting Microsoft's Privacy Practices" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 505, September 10, 2002.
See also, story titled "EPIC Submits Privacy Complaint To FTC Regarding JetBlue" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 744, September 23, 2003.
The filing of this complaint by the EPIC has a broader goal -- affecting European Union policy. The complaint states that the EU "has expressed concern that the United States government's collection and use of passenger information from European airlines may violate EU data protection laws. Officials from the United States and EU recently reached a temporary agreement on the matter after extensive negotiation. Moreover, privacy officials around the word have urged the establishment of privacy safeguards for airline passenger information."
See also, story titled "Europeans Agree to Transfer of Airline Passenger Data to DHS" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 801, December 17, 2003.
Said Rotenberg on January 20, "we do want the European Union to be aware that that this action is going forward".
1/20. The Supreme Court granted certiorari in BellSouth v. Covad and Qwest v. Metronet Services. In both cases, the Court granted certiorari, and ordered that "The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded" to the Courts of Appeals "for further consideration in light of Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko, LLP, 540 U.S. ___ (2004)." See, Order List [8 pages in PDF], at page 1.
In addition, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Cavalier Telephone v. Verizon Virginia, No. 03-271. See, Order List [8 pages in PDF], at page 2. All of these cases turned on the issue decided in Verizon v. Trinko.
On January 13, 2004, the Supreme Court issued its opinion [22 pages in PDF] in Verizon v. Trinko, reversing the U.S. Court of Appeals (2ndCir). The Supreme Court held that a claim alleging a breach of an ILEC's duty under the 1996 Telecom Act to share its network with competitors does not state a violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. See, TLJ story titled "Supreme Court Holds That There is No Sherman Act Claim in Verizon v. Trinko", January 13, 2004.
These cases are BellSouth Corporation, et al. v. Covad Communications Co., No. 02-1423, on petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit; Qwest Corporation v. Metronet Services Corporation, No. 02-241, on petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit; and Cavalier Telephone v. Verizon Virginia, Inc., No. 03-271, on petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.
On May 20, 2003, the U.S. Court of Appeals (4thCir) issued its split opinion [27 pages in PDF] in Cavalier Telephone v. Verizon Virginia. See, story titled "4th Circuit Rules on Relation of Telecom Act to Antitrust Law" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 667, May 22, 2003.
On May 21, 2003 the U.S. Court of Appeals (9thCir) issued its amended opinion [47 pages in PDF] in MetroNet Services v. U S West. See, story titled "9th Circuit Rules on Antitrust Immunity of ILECs" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 634, April 1, 2003.
On August 2, 2002 the U.S. Court of Appeals (11thCir) issued its opinion in Covad v. BellSouth. It is reported at 299 F.3d 1272. See also, story titled "Divided 11th Circuit Denies Rehearing En Banc in Covad v. BellSouth" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 573, December 23, 2002.
1/20. The Supreme Court denied certiorari in Skywalker Communications of Indiana v. Skywalker Communications, Inc., No. 03-753. See, Order List [8 pages in PDF], at page 2. On June 25, 2003 the U.S. Court of Appeals (7thCir) issued its opinion [5 pages in PDF] in the Skywalker case. It is also reported at 333 F3d 829. This case is a contract dispute involving the sale of satellite equipement.
1/20. The Supreme Court announced that "The Court will take a recess from Monday, January 26, 2004, until Monday, February 23, 2004. See, Order List [8 pages in PDF], at page 8.
The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider several non technology related items under suspension of the rules. See, Republican Whip Notice.
10:00 AM. The House Judiciary Committee will meet to mark up 11 bills and resolutions. Several are technology related, including HR 3261, the "Database and Collections of Information Misappropriation Act", HR 2391, the "Cooperative Research and Technology Enhancement (CREATE) Act of 2003", and HR 2824, the "Internet Tobacco Sales Enforcement Act". The event will be webcast by the Committee. Location: Room 2141, Rayburn Building.
12:00 NOON - 1:45 PM. The AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies will host a panel discussion titled "What's Right and What's Wrong with Corporate Finance Governance in the U.S. Today?". The speakers will be Robert Hahn (AEI-Brookings), Randall Kroszner (University of Chicago), Paul Atkins (SEC Commissioner), and Steven Kaplan (University of Chicago). See, notice. Location: American Enterprise Institute, Twelfth floor, 1150 17th St., NW.
12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Transactional Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be contract enforceability and dispute resolution provisions, including arbitration versus judicial resolution, choice of law, and choice of forum. For more information, contact Laurie Sherman at laurabsherman@hotmail.com or 703 216-3150. Location: Skadden Arps, 1440 New York Ave., 11th floor.
1:00 - 3:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) will hold a seminar on "Filing Spectrum Leasing Applications and Notifications". The event will be webcast by the FCC. See, webcast notice. Location: FCC, 445 12th Street, SW, Room TW-C305 (Commission Meeting Room).
4:00 PM. Rebecca Eisenberg (University of Michigan Law School) will present a paper at an event sponsored by the Dean Dinwoodey Center for Intellectual Property Studies. For more information, contact Robert Brauneis at 202 994-6138 or rbraun@law.gwu.edu. Location: George Washington University Law School, Faculty Conference Center, Burns Building, 5th Floor, 716 20th Street, NW.
 9:30 - 11:00 AM. Panel on spectrum. The moderator will be Paul Kolodzy.
 11:05 AM - 12:35 PM. Panel on digital content. The moderator will by Richard Wiley.
 2:00 - 3:30 PM. Panel on broadband. The moderator will be John Nakahata.
 3:35 - 5:05 PM. Panel titled "Potholes in the Superhighway". The moderator will be Bryan Tramont.
 5:10 - 6:00 PM. Speech by FCC Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy titled "Overview of the Road to Convergence: New Realities Collide with Old Rules".
10:00 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee will hold a hearing an pending judicial nominees, including Raymond Gruender (nominated to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit), Ricardo Martinez (Western District of Washington), Gene Pratter (Eastern District of Pennsylvania), and Neil Vincent Wake (District of Arizona). See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.
10:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Technological Advisory Council will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 19, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 244, at Pages 70796 - 70797. Location: FCC, 445 12th St., SW, Room TW-C305.
10:00 AM. The U.S. District Court (DC) will hold a status conference in United States v. Microsoft, D.C. No. 98-1232 (CKK) and New York, et. al. v. Microsoft, D.C. No. 98-1232 (CKK), Judge Colleen Kotelly presiding. Location: Courtroom 11.
12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be "Hot Communications Issues on the Hill". The speakers will be Neil Fried (Republican Counsel, House Commerce Committee), Gregg Rothschild (Democratic Counsel, House Commerce Committee), Lee Carosi (Republican Counsel, Senate Commerce Committee), and Paul Nagle (Attorney-Advisor, FCC Office of Legislative Affairs). For more information, contact Jason Friedrich at 202 354-1340 or jasonfriedrich@dbr.com or Pam Slipakoff at 202 418-7705 or pslipako@fcc.gov. Location: Drinker Biddle & Reath, 1500 K Street, 11th Floor.
Deadline to submit reply comments to the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) regarding the operation and effectiveness of, and the implementation of and compliance with, the World Trade Organization (WTO) Basic Telecommunications Agreement, other WTO agreements affecting market opportunities for U.S. telecommunications products and services, the telecommunications provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), Chile FTA and Singapore FTA, and other telecommunications trade agreements. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 8, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 235, at Pages 68444 - 68445.
Extended deadline to submit comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [35 pages in PDF] regarding unlicensed devices. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 10, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 237, at Pages 68823 - 68831. The FCC adopted this NPRM on September 10, 2003. See, FCC release [PDF]. The FCC released the NPRM [35 pages in PDF] on September 17, 2003. This NPRM is FCC 03-223 in ET Docket No. 03-201. See also, stories titled "FCC Announces NPRM Regarding Unlicensed Devices" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 739, September 15, 2003, and "FCC Announces Deadlines for Comments on Unlicensed Devices NPRM" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 800, December 16, 2003. See also, FCC order [PDF] extending the deadline from January 9 to January 23.
2:00 - 5:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Advisory Committee on Diversity for Communications in the Digital Age will hold its second meeting. See, FCC notice [PDF] and notice in the Federal Register, January 5, 2004, Vol. 69, No. 2, at Page 345. Location: Commission Meeting Room, Room TW-C305, 445 12th St. SW.
Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) pertaining to promoting spectrum based services in rural areas. See, notice in the Federal Register summarizing this NPRM, and story titled "FCC Announces NPRM Regarding Regulations Affecting the Use of Spectrum in Rural Areas" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 739, September 15, 2003. This NPRM is FCC 03-222 in WT Docket Nos. 02-381, 01-14, and 03-202. The FCC adopted this NPRM on September 10, 2003, and released it on October 6, 2003. See, Federal Register, November 12, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 218, at Pages 64050-64072.
EXTENDED TO FEBRUARY 7. Deadline to submit reply comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in response to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [35 pages in PDF] regarding unlicensed devices. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 10, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 237, at Pages 68823 - 68831. The FCC adopted this NPRM on September 10, 2003. See, FCC release [PDF]. The FCC released the NPRM [35 pages in PDF] on September 17, 2003. This NPRM is FCC 03-223 in ET Docket No. 03-201. See also, stories titled "FCC Announces NPRM Regarding Unlicensed Devices" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 739, September 15, 2003, and "FCC Announces Deadlines for Comments on Unlicensed Devices NPRM" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 800, December 16, 2003.
Deadline to submit comments to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in response to its notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes changes to the rules governing practice before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences to consolidate and simplify such rules and to reflect developments in case law, legislation, and administrative practice. See, notice in the Federal Register, November 26, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 228, at Pages 66647 - 66691.
10:00 AM - 4:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will host an event titled "Satellite Rural Forum". The agenda includes, among other topics, broadband access, information and mass media entertainment, telemedicine and distance learning. See, notice and agenda [5 pages in PDF]. Location: FCC, 455 12th Street, SW.
9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in USTA v. FCC, No. 00-1020. Judges Edwards, Randolph and Williams will preside. Location: 333 Constitution Ave., NW.
10:00 AM. The House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet will hold a hearing titled "Can you say that on TV?': An Examination of the FCC's Enforcement with Respect to Broadcast Indecency". The hearing will be webcast. See, notice. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.
12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Online Communications Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch titled "Legislative and Regulatory Update on Internet and E-Commerce Privacy Issues". The speakers will be Chris Hoofnagel (EPIC) and Heidi Salow (Nextel). For more information, contact Vincent Paladini, Karlyn Stanley (CRB, 202 828-9835), or Amy Wolverton. Location: Cole Raywid & Braverman, 1919 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Suite 200.
6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) Wireless Practice Committee will host a Continuing Legal Education (CLE) program titled "Implementing the FCC's Secondary Markets Order". The prices to attend range from $50 to $125. Location: Wiley Rein & Fielding, 1750 K Street, NW, 10th Floor.
Deadline to submit requests to participate in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) public round table meeting on the effectiveness of inter partes reexamination proceedings, tentatively scheduled for February 17, 2004. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 30, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 249, at Pages 75217 - 75218.
1/20. Lisa Zaina (at right) was named Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC). Zaina is currently senior legal advisor to FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein. She will replace Cheryl Parrino as head of the waste and fraud plagued USAC. Zaina was previously Vice President for Industry and Regulatory Affairs and Corporate Secretary of Shenandoah Telecommunications Company (Shentel) in Edinburg, Virginia. Before that, she worked at Wallman Strategic Consulting. And before that, she worked at the FCC, as Senior Counsel and Deputy Bureau Chief of the Common Carrier Bureau. She has also worked for the Organization for the Promotion and Advancement of Small Telecommunications Companies (OPASTCO), and the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC). See, FCC release [PDF] and Adelstein statement [PDF].
1/20. President Bush nominated Claude Allen to be a Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Allen is the Deputy Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) at the Department of HHS. Before that he was the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for the Commonwealth of Virginia. See, White House release.
1/20. President Bush nominated Paul Diamond to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. See, White House release.
1/20. President Bush nominated Robert Bryan Harwell to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina. See, White House release.
1/20. President Bush nominated George Schiavelli to be a Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. See, White House release.
1/20. Glenn Hutchins and Mark Neporent were named to the board of MCI WorldCom. Hutchins is a founder and managing member of investment firm Silver Lake Partners. Neporent is COO, General Counsel, and Senior Managing Director of Cerberus Capital Management. See, MCI release.
1/20. President Bush delivered the annual State of the Union Address to a joint session of Congress. He did not address technology related policy. However, he did state that "As technology transforms the way almost every job is done, America becomes more productive, and workers need new skills. Much of our job growth will be found in high-skilled fields like health care and biotechnology. So we must respond by helping more Americans gain the skills to find good jobs in our new economy."
1/20. The European Union stated in a release that the "Council of Ministers responsible for economic and monetary affairs today gave its final approval to a new Merger Regulation which will come into force on May 1st. The formal adoption follows the unanimous political agreement at the Competitiveness Council on 27 November 2003." The EU also released a FAQs page. It further stated that "The new Merger Regulation, the Horizontal Guidelines and the Best Practices will be published in the coming days on the Commission's Competition website".
1/20. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published in its website the comments that it has received regarding the proposed rule changes regarding revision of patent term extension and patent term adjustment provisions related to decisions by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. See, notice in the Federal Register, December 4, 2003, Vol. 68, No. 233, at Pages 67818 - 67821, requesting comments.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 V. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.