Notice of Availability of and Request for Comments on Green Paper Concerning Restriction Practice, 32761-32762 [05-11177]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 107 / Monday, June 6, 2005 / Notices
Patent Ext., P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria,
VA 22313–1450; by fax marked to her
attention at (571) 273–7744; or by e-mail
to Karin.Ferriter@uspto.gov.
Section
156 of Title 35, United States Code,
generally provides that the term of a
patent may be extended for a period of
up to five years if the patent claims a
product, or a method of making or using
a product, that has been subject to
certain defined regulatory review, and
that the patent may be extended for
interim periods of up to a year if the
regulatory review is anticipated to
extend beyond the expiration date of the
patent.
On May 4, 2005, Intarcia
Therapeutics, Inc., on behalf of patent
owner Schering Aktiengesellschaft,
timely filed an application under 35
U.S.C. 156(d)(5) for a second interim
extension of the term of U.S. Patent No.
4,591,585. The patent claims the
product atamestane. The application
indicates that a New Drug Application
for the human drug product atamestane
has been filed and is currently
undergoing regulatory review before the
Food and Drug Administration for
permission to market or use the product
commercially.
Review of the application indicates
that except for permission to market or
use the product commercially, the
subject patent would be eligible for an
extension of the patent term under 35
U.S.C. 156, and that the patent should
be extended for an additional period of
one year as required by 35 U.S.C.
156(d)(5)(C). Since it is apparent that
the regulatory review period will
continue beyond the extended
expiration date of the patent (June 18,
2005), interim extension of the patent
term under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) is
appropriate.
An interim extension under 35 U.S.C.
156(d)(5) of the term of U.S. Patent No.
4,591,585 is granted for a period of one
year from the expiration date of the
patent, i.e., until June 18, 2006.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: May 26, 2005.
Jon W. Dudas,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 05–11175 Filed 6–3–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:25 Jun 03, 2005
Jkt 205001
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No. 2005–P–064]
Grant of Interim Extension of the Term
of U.S. Patent No. 4,567,264;
Ranolazine
United States Patent and
Trademark Office.
ACTION: Notice of interim patent term
extension.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office has issued a
certificate under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) for
a third one-year interim extension of the
term of U.S. Patent No. 4,567,264.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karin Ferriter by telephone at (571)272–
7744; by mail marked to her attention
and addressed to Mail Stop Patent Ext.,
Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450; by
fax marked to her attention at (571)273–
7744; or by e-mail to
Karin.Ferriter@uspto.gov.
Section
156 of Title 35, United States Code,
generally provides that the term of a
patent may be extended for a period of
up to five years if the patent claims a
product, or a method of making or using
a product, that has been subject to
certain defined regulatory review, and
that the patent may be extended for
interim periods of up to a year if the
regulatory review is anticipated to
extend beyond the expiration date of the
patent.
On March 25, 2005, patent owner
Roche Palo Alto LLC, timely filed an
application under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5)
for a third interim extension of the term
of U.S. Patent No. 4,567,264. The patent
claims the active ingredient ranolazine
(RanexaTM). The application indicates,
and the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) has confirmed, that a New Drug
Application for the human drug product
ranolazine has been filed and is
currently undergoing regulatory review
before the FDA for permission to market
or use the product commercially.
Review of the application indicates
that, except for permission to market or
use the product commercially, the
subject patent would be eligible for an
extension of the patent term under 35
U.S.C. 156, and that the patent should
be extended for an additional period of
one year as required by 35 U.S.C.
156(d)(5)(C). Since it is apparent that
the regulatory review period will
continue beyond the extended
expiration date of the patent (May 18,
2005), the term of the patent will be
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32761
extended under 35 U.S.C. 156(d)(5) for
an additional year.
An interim extension under 35 U.S.C.
156(d)(5) of the term of U.S. Patent No.
4,567,264 is granted for an additional
period of one year from the extended
expiration date of the patent, i.e., until
May 18, 2006.
Dated: May 26, 2005.
Jon W. Dudas,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 05–11176 Filed 6–3–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: 2003–P–018]
Notice of Availability of and Request
for Comments on Green Paper
Concerning Restriction Practice
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (USPTO) has
established a 21st Century Strategic Plan
to transform the USPTO into a quality
focused, highly productive, responsive
organization supporting a market-driven
intellectual property system. As a part
of this plan, the USPTO is conducting
a study of its restriction practice. As
part of this study, the Office requested
public comments to help guide the
study. After careful consideration of the
public comments and an internal
review, the USPTO has prepared a
‘‘Green Paper’’ describing and
evaluating four options to reform
restriction practice suggested by various
members of the public. Prior to
considering the desirability of drafting
proposed legislation in a ‘‘White Paper’’
on reforming restriction practice, the
USPTO is seeking public comment on
the Green Paper.
DATES: Comment Deadline Date: To be
ensured of consideration, written
comments must be received on or before
August 5, 2005. No public hearing will
be held.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent
by electronic mail message over the
Internet addressed to:
unity.comments@uspto.gov. Comments
may also be submitted by mail
addressed to: Mail Stop Comments—
Patents, Commissioner for Patents, P.O.
Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313–1450,
or by facsimile to (571) 273–7735,
marked to the attention of Robert A.
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
32762
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 107 / Monday, June 6, 2005 / Notices
Clarke. Although comments may be
submitted by mail or facsimile, the
Office prefers to receive comments via
the Internet. If comments are submitted
by mail, the Office prefers that the
comments be submitted on a DOS
formatted 31⁄2 inch disk accompanied by
a paper copy.
Comments may also be sent by
electronic mail message over the
Internet via the Federal eRulemaking
Portal. See the Federal eRulemaking
Portal Web site (https://
www.regulations.gov) for additional
instructions on providing comments via
the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
The comments will be available for
public inspection at the Office of the
Commissioner for Patents, located in
Madison East, Tenth Floor, 600 Dulany
Street, Alexandria, Virginia, and will be
available through anonymous file
transfer protocol (ftp) via the Internet
(address: https://www.uspto.gov).
Because comments will be made
available for public inspection,
information that is not desired to be
made public, such as an address or
phone number, should not be included
in the comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert A. Clarke, Senior Legal Advisor,
Office of Patent Legal Administration,
Office of the Deputy Commissioner for
Patent Examination Policy, by telephone
at (571) 272–7735, by mail addressed to:
Mail Stop Comments—Patents,
Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313–1450, or
by facsimile to (571) 273–7735, marked
to the attention of Robert A. Clarke, or
preferably via e-mail addressed to:
robert.clarke@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
USPTO established a 21st Century
Strategic Plan to transform the USPTO
into a more quality-focused, highly
productive, responsive organization
supporting a market-driven intellectual
property system. As part of this plan,
the USPTO stated it would conduct a
study of the changes needed to
implement a Patent Cooperation Treaty
(PCT) style Unity of Invention standard
in the United States. Prior to starting a
detailed study, the USPTO published a
notice seeking public comment on a
number of issues to help guide the
scope and content of a study on the
adoption of a Unity of Invention
standard in the United States. See
Request for Comments on the Study of
the Changes Needed to Implement a
Unity of Invention Standard in the
United States, 68 FR 27536 (May 20,
2003), 1271 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 98
(June 17, 2003). In response to that
notice, the USPTO received twenty-six
VerDate jul<14>2003
14:25 Jun 03, 2005
Jkt 205001
(26) public comments. Those public
comments were posted on the USPTO’s
Internet Web site.
The USPTO posted a notice
summarizing the general nature of the
comments received as well as the next
steps in the study in November of 2004.
See Summary of Public Comments and
the Restriction Reform Options to be
Studied by the United States Patent and
Trademark Office, 1277 Off. Gaz. Pat.
Office 94 (Dec. 16, 2003) (Notice). The
Notice indicated that as a result of the
comments received, the USPTO would
conduct a detailed business-case
analysis on four restriction reform
options and prepare a revised timeline
to complete the study. The USPTO also
replaced the public comments and
schedule to implement a PCT-style
Unity of Invention standard with the
Notice.
The USPTO study included a review
of hundreds of applications under each
of the studied options including how
examination practices would be
impacted. This study also included
review of the workflow, pendency and
overall ability of the USPTO to
appropriately implement each of the
standards. The interim results of the
study are provided in the Green Paper
for which we are requesting comment
via this notice. The Green Paper is
available on the USPTO’s Internet Web
site (https://www.uspto.gov).
Dated: May 27, 2005.
Jon W. Dudas,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 05–11177 Filed 6–3–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
COMMITTEE FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF TEXTILE
AGREEMENTS
Denial of Commercial Availability
Request under the United StatesCaribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act
(CBTPA)
June 1, 2005.
The Committee for the
Implementation of Textile Agreements
(CITA).
ACTION: Denial of the request alleging
that certain coat weight fabrics of 100
percent carded camel hair, 100 percent
carded cashmere, or a blend of carded
cashmere and wool fibers cannot be
supplied by the domestic industry in
commercial quantities in a timely
manner under the CBTPA.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On March 30, 2005 the
Chairman of CITA received a petition
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
from Neville Peterson, LLP, on behalf of
S. Rothschild & Co., Inc. of New York,
New York, alleging that certain coat
weight fabrics of 100 percent carded
camel hair, 100 percent carded
cashmere, or a blend of carded cashmere
and wool fibers, classified in
subheading 5111.19.6020 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the
United States (HTSUS), cannot be
supplied by the domestic industry in
commercial quantities in a timely
manner. The petition requested that
outerwear articles of such fabrics be
eligible for preferential treatment under
the U.S. - Caribbean Basin Trade
Partnership Act (CBTPA). CITA has
determined that the subject fabrics can
be supplied by the domestic industry in
commercial quantities in a timely
manner and, therefore, denies the
request.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Janet E. Heinzen, International Trade
Specialist, Office of Textiles and
Apparel, U.S. Department of Commerce,
(202) 482-3400.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority: Section 213(b)(2)(A)(v)(II) of the
Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, as
added by Section 211(a) of the CBTPA;
Section 6 of Executive Order No. 13191 of
January 17, 2001; Presidential Proclamations
7351 of October 2, 2000.
BACKGROUND: The CBTPA provides
for quota- and duty-free treatment for
qualifying textile and apparel products.
Such treatment is generally limited to
products manufactured from yarns and
fabrics formed in the United States or a
beneficiary country. The CBTPA also
provides for quota- and duty-free
treatment for apparel articles that are
both cut (or knit-to-shape) and sewn or
otherwise assembled in one or more
beneficiary countries from fabric or yarn
that is not formed in the United States,
if it has been determined that such
fabric or yarn cannot be supplied by the
domestic industry in commercial
quantities in a timely manner. In
Executive Order No. 13191 (66 FR
7271), CITA has been delegated the
authority to determine whether yarns or
fabrics cannot be supplied by the
domestic industry in commercial
quantities in a timely manner under the
CBTPA. On March 6, 2001, CITA
published procedures that it will follow
in considering requests (66 FR 13502).
On March 30, 2005 the Chairman of
CITA received a petition from Neville
Peterson, LLP, on behalf of S.
Rothschild & Co., Inc. of New York,
New York, alleging that certain coat
weight fabrics of 100 percent carded
camel hair, 100 percent carded
cashmere, or a blend of carded cashmere
E:\FR\FM\06JNN1.SGM
06JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 107 (Monday, June 6, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32761-32762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-11177]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No.: 2003-P-018]
Notice of Availability of and Request for Comments on Green Paper
Concerning Restriction Practice
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has
established a 21st Century Strategic Plan to transform the USPTO into a
quality focused, highly productive, responsive organization supporting
a market-driven intellectual property system. As a part of this plan,
the USPTO is conducting a study of its restriction practice. As part of
this study, the Office requested public comments to help guide the
study. After careful consideration of the public comments and an
internal review, the USPTO has prepared a ``Green Paper'' describing
and evaluating four options to reform restriction practice suggested by
various members of the public. Prior to considering the desirability of
drafting proposed legislation in a ``White Paper'' on reforming
restriction practice, the USPTO is seeking public comment on the Green
Paper.
DATES: Comment Deadline Date: To be ensured of consideration, written
comments must be received on or before August 5, 2005. No public
hearing will be held.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent by electronic mail message over the
Internet addressed to: unity.comments@uspto.gov. Comments may also be
submitted by mail addressed to: Mail Stop Comments--Patents,
Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450, or
by facsimile to (571) 273-7735, marked to the attention of Robert A.
[[Page 32762]]
Clarke. Although comments may be submitted by mail or facsimile, the
Office prefers to receive comments via the Internet. If comments are
submitted by mail, the Office prefers that the comments be submitted on
a DOS formatted 3\1/2\ inch disk accompanied by a paper copy.
Comments may also be sent by electronic mail message over the
Internet via the Federal eRulemaking Portal. See the Federal
eRulemaking Portal Web site (https://www.regulations.gov) for additional
instructions on providing comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
The comments will be available for public inspection at the Office
of the Commissioner for Patents, located in Madison East, Tenth Floor,
600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia, and will be available through
anonymous file transfer protocol (ftp) via the Internet (address:
https://www.uspto.gov). Because comments will be made available for
public inspection, information that is not desired to be made public,
such as an address or phone number, should not be included in the
comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert A. Clarke, Senior Legal
Advisor, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of the Deputy
Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, by telephone at (571) 272-
7735, by mail addressed to: Mail Stop Comments--Patents, Commissioner
for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA, 22313-1450, or by facsimile
to (571) 273-7735, marked to the attention of Robert A. Clarke, or
preferably via e-mail addressed to: robert.clarke@uspto.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The USPTO established a 21st Century
Strategic Plan to transform the USPTO into a more quality-focused,
highly productive, responsive organization supporting a market-driven
intellectual property system. As part of this plan, the USPTO stated it
would conduct a study of the changes needed to implement a Patent
Cooperation Treaty (PCT) style Unity of Invention standard in the
United States. Prior to starting a detailed study, the USPTO published
a notice seeking public comment on a number of issues to help guide the
scope and content of a study on the adoption of a Unity of Invention
standard in the United States. See Request for Comments on the Study of
the Changes Needed to Implement a Unity of Invention Standard in the
United States, 68 FR 27536 (May 20, 2003), 1271 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office
98 (June 17, 2003). In response to that notice, the USPTO received
twenty-six (26) public comments. Those public comments were posted on
the USPTO's Internet Web site.
The USPTO posted a notice summarizing the general nature of the
comments received as well as the next steps in the study in November of
2004. See Summary of Public Comments and the Restriction Reform Options
to be Studied by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, 1277
Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 94 (Dec. 16, 2003) (Notice). The Notice indicated
that as a result of the comments received, the USPTO would conduct a
detailed business-case analysis on four restriction reform options and
prepare a revised timeline to complete the study. The USPTO also
replaced the public comments and schedule to implement a PCT-style
Unity of Invention standard with the Notice.
The USPTO study included a review of hundreds of applications under
each of the studied options including how examination practices would
be impacted. This study also included review of the workflow, pendency
and overall ability of the USPTO to appropriately implement each of the
standards. The interim results of the study are provided in the Green
Paper for which we are requesting comment via this notice. The Green
Paper is available on the USPTO's Internet Web site (https://
www.uspto.gov).
Dated: May 27, 2005.
Jon W. Dudas,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 05-11177 Filed 6-3-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P
