Managing Intellectual Property

Fee-setting bill could delay patent reform

20 May 2010

Eileen McDermott, New York

US House of Representatives Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers and ranking member Lamar Smith have introduced a bill to transfer fee-setting authority from Congress to the USPTO director

Patent and trade mark fees are presently set by statute, with the director authorised to adjust the fees under certain circumstances.

The bill was introduced Wednesday, after reports that a separate bill dealing with fee-setting authority (which had not yet been introduced on the floor) had been withdrawn.

The key difference in the latest bill –the Patent and Trademark Office Funding Stabilization Act of 2010 – is that it includes a provision to end Congress’ ability to divert user fees above the appropriated amount. John Conyers

In a statement, Conyers said that the initial bill was withdrawn because, “upon reflection, it has become evident that fee setting authority, fee diversion, and a temporary surcharge are interrelated”.

The bill would authorise an immediate 15% surcharge on user fees for the Office, require that the USPTO director provide an annual report to Congress detailing the Office’s fiscal performance for the...



Only subscribers have complete access to Managing IP Magazine, log in or subscribe now.

Alternatively take a free trial, giving you 48-hour access to Managing IP Magazine (some articles and surveys may be excluded).

Subscribe Now

This article is available to subscribers. Please click subscribe to read the rest of the article.

Subscribe

Take a free trial

Please take a free 48-hour trial to gain limited access. Some articles and surveys may be excluded.

Take a free trial


INTA Daily News 2012

Read this year's INTA Daily News - published daily by Managing IP direct from the 134th INTA Annual Meeting in Washington DC

null null null
null null

May 2012

Do you want to be famous?

Famous, well-known, notorious, reputed: everyone wants enhanced protection for their trade marks. But should they, and what does it mean if it is? Emma Barraclough explains



Most read articles

Poll

Will the new post grant and inter partes review proceedings result in more litigators practising pro hac vice before the USPTO?







Supplements