American Government Simulation forums · American Government Simulation | Help Search Members Calendar |
Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register ) | Resend Validation Email |
Pages: (2) [1] 2 ( Go to first unread post ) |
weekendwarrior |
Posted: Nov 18 2004, 03:58 PM
|
Speaker (The Legalist) Group: Members Posts: 1475 Member No.: 147 Joined: 21-August 04 |
Mr. Laverone, of California, Mr. Schmidt, Ms. Wood, Mr. Mers, Mr. Heortman, Mr. Jordan, Mr. Cloe, Mr. Wisniewski, Mr. Mondragon, Mr. Garwood, Mr. keiffer, and Mr. Forsyth submit to the House Committee on Appropriations
A BILL To provide funding to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for the purpose of speeding up the processing of pending patents. Be it encated by the President of the United States and both houses of Congress assembled. SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE THis bill may be referred to as the "US Patent Support Act" SECTION 2. FINDINGS The Congress finds that, 1. The economy of the United States of America is primarily driven by the development of new products 2. Patents issued by the United States provide a necessary protection for intellectual property, and help encourage research and development. 3. The United States Patent and Trademark Office has more than five-hundred-thousand (500,000) patent applications awaiting processing, and that this number is expected to continue growing. 4. The United States Patent and Trademark Office expects the wait period for patent approval to extend to as much as five (5) years. 5. This problem can be traced to bugetary deficentcies and a lack of clerks to process the applications. 6. As much as $650 million collected in User Fees paid by patent applicants is used to fund programs unrelated to the USPTO in any way, shape, or form. SECTION 3. DEFINITONS 1. USER FEE is defined as a surcharge payed by patent applicants to the USPTO upon filing of a new patent. SECTION 4. USE OF USER FEES BY THE GOVERNMENT The User Fees charged by the United States Patent and Trademark Office shall be used soley for the purposes of paying off expenses incurred by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Upon encatment of this bill, the federal govenrment is expressly prohibited from using revenue derived from said User Fees to pay expenses incurred by programs not related to the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Upon enactment, the USPTO shall submit to the Congress an annual report containing reccomendations for the size of the fees to be payed by patent applicants. Thses reccomendations shall go into effect upon approval of Congress. SECTION 5. ENACTMENT This bill, upon approval by the President of the United States and both houses of the Congress of the United States, shall go into effect March 1, 2005. |
Viper NASCAR |
Posted: Nov 19 2004, 06:20 AM
|
Unconventional Warfare Group: Admin Posts: 1016 Member No.: 366 Joined: 14-November 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I STRONGLY support this bill which will provide funding to the United States Patent and Trademark Office. It is ridiculous for an inventor to have to wait for five years to have their inventions patented. Adequate funding will hopefully speed up the patent processing. That being said, I urge my fellow congressmen to vote favorably on it as well. |
Fayul |
Posted: Nov 19 2004, 01:07 PM
|
Master Snuggle Wumpkins, I need your soft, absorbent advice! Group: Members Posts: 404 Member No.: 325 Joined: 31-October 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I agree strongly with my fellow representative. This bill will greatly increase the efficency of the US patent office while having little effect on the economy. As such, I hope all of us may vote favorably on it. |
Joe Cienciolo |
Posted: Nov 19 2004, 03:55 PM
|
The Man Who Paved Paradise To Put Up A Parking Lot Group: Members Posts: 1103 Member No.: 95 Joined: 20-August 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I join my colleagues across in support of this bill. I urge that this body pass it. I Yield. |
Pro-Union Republican |
Posted: Nov 19 2004, 08:15 PM
|
Socially Conservative Third Wayer Group: Members Posts: 2364 Member No.: 196 Joined: 3-September 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I motion for unanimous consent. I yield. |
Leif Roberts |
Posted: Nov 19 2004, 09:36 PM
|
Moving to Canada Group: Members Posts: 171 Member No.: 311 Joined: 23-October 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I second the motion for uc. I yield. |
Fayul |
Posted: Nov 19 2004, 10:28 PM
|
Master Snuggle Wumpkins, I need your soft, absorbent advice! Group: Members Posts: 404 Member No.: 325 Joined: 31-October 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I also second the motion for Unanimous consent. I yield. |
tompea |
Posted: Nov 20 2004, 04:47 PM
|
Safe Incumbent Group: Members Posts: 1404 Member No.: 317 Joined: 28-October 04 |
Mr. SPT,
The motion for UC has been numerously seconded, I nevertheless am compelled to go on record in support of this basic common sense approach to patent administration. The UC, and the nature of this bill are a good opportunity to move expeditiously, and devote time in this body to more thorny issues that lack the clarity of the present case. I yield |
bcarlson33 |
Posted: Nov 20 2004, 05:51 PM
|
||||
Squeaky clean like a rubber duckie Group: Admin Posts: 7841 Member No.: 1 Joined: 18-August 04 |
Mr. Speaker, First, as we all should know by now, there is no need to second a motion for unanimous consent. Second, I object to the call for unanimous consent. I object because this bill does not do what it says it should. A technical requirement about budget line items is not going to speed up the backlog at the patent office. But I have an amendment that will. I move to amend the bill as follows: To replace the following:
with the following:
|
||||
Mick Peruzza |
Posted: Nov 20 2004, 06:19 PM
|
Safe Incumbent Group: Members Posts: 1292 Member No.: 323 Joined: 29-October 04 |
Mr Speaker
I 2nd and yield |
weekendwarrior |
Posted: Dec 8 2004, 06:04 PM
|
||||
Speaker (The Legalist) Group: Members Posts: 1475 Member No.: 147 Joined: 21-August 04 |
The following amendment has been passed the original bill
the proposed amendment
|
||||
Crysnia |
Posted: Dec 10 2004, 06:30 PM
|
Estne volumen in toga, an solum tibi libet me videre? Group: Members Posts: 1263 Member No.: 211 Joined: 9-September 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
Now that the amendment has fixed the previously mentioned problem, I move for Unanimous Consent. I yield. |
Pro-Union Republican |
Posted: Dec 10 2004, 08:31 PM
|
Socially Conservative Third Wayer Group: Members Posts: 2364 Member No.: 196 Joined: 3-September 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I second the motion for UC. I yield. |
jayrmckenzie |
Posted: Dec 10 2004, 09:30 PM
|
Titleholder Group: Members Posts: 103 Member No.: 386 Joined: 3-December 04 |
Mr. Speaker,
I object to the unanimous consent motion. I believe that this House should be allocating funds to higher priorities. I doubt that increasing the funding for the Patient and Trademark Office will speed up the process. There are reasons that the process is lengthy, it is a comprehensive process. The government must balance speed with responsibility. Despite this I simply believe the legislation is a poor allocation of funds that should be spent in other areas of a higher priority. Americans are concerned with funding education and social security. Let us make this our priority and stop wasteful spending that is unlikely to achieve results. I urge the members of this House to vote no. I yield. |
tompea |
Posted: Dec 10 2004, 11:46 PM
|
Safe Incumbent Group: Members Posts: 1404 Member No.: 317 Joined: 28-October 04 |
Mr Speaker,
Just checking here, but does the gentleman from Minnesota realize we are talking about 1.1 million dollars here? I yield. |
Pages: (2) [1] 2 |