Changes to Eliminate the Disclosure Document Program, 17399-17401 [E6-4833]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Regulations
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to
amend 33 CFR part 117 as follows:
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1; 33
CFR 1.05–1(g); § 117.255 also issued under
the authority of Pub. L. 102–587, 106 Stat.
5039.
2. On June 17, 2006, from 9 a.m. to
5 p.m., § 117.593 is suspended and a
new § 117.T594 is added to read as
follows:
§ 117.T594
Chelsea River.
(a) All drawbridges across the Chelsea
River shall open on signal; except that
the P.J. McArdle Bridge, mile 0.3, need
not open for the passage of vessel traffic
from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. on June 17, 2006.
(b) The opening signal for each
drawbridge is two prolonged blasts
followed by two short blasts and one
prolonged blast. The acknowledging
signal is three prolonged blasts when
the draw can be opened immediately
and two prolonged blasts when the
draw cannot be opened or is open and
must be closed.
Dated: March 21, 2006.
David P. Pekoske,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. E6–4900 Filed 4–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark
Office
37 CFR Part 1
[Docket No.: PTO–P–2006–0005]
RIN 0651–AC01
Changes to Eliminate the Disclosure
Document Program
United States Patent and
Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and
Trademark Office (Office) implemented
the Disclosure Document Program in
1969 in order to provide an alternative
form of evidence of conception of an
invention to, for example, a ‘‘selfaddressed envelope’’ containing a
disclosure of an invention. It appears,
however, that few, if any, inventors
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:19 Apr 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
obtain any actual benefit from a
disclosure document, and some
inventors who use the Disclosure
Document Program believe that they are
actually filing an application for a
patent. In addition, a provisional
application for patent affords better
benefits and protection to inventors
than a disclosure document. Therefore,
the Office is proposing to eliminate the
Disclosure Document Program.
Comment Deadline Date: To be
ensured of consideration, written
comments must be received on or before
May 8, 2006. No public hearing will be
held.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent
by electronic mail message over the
Internet addressed to
ddp.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 Catherine M.
Kirik. 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 via the Office Internet Web site
(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:
Catherine M. Kirik, Office of the
Commissioner for Patents, by telephone
at (571) 272–8040, by mail addressed to:
Mail Stop Comments—Patents,
Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA 22313–1450, or by
facsimile to (571) 273–0170, marked to
the attention of Catherine M. Kirik.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An
inventor may file a disclosure document
with the Office which includes a written
description and drawings of his or her
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17399
invention in sufficient detail to enable
a person of ordinary skill in the art to
make and use the invention to establish
a date of conception of an invention in
the United States under 35 U.S.C. 104
prior to the application filing date. The
inventor must sign the disclosure
document and include a separate signed
cover letter identifying the papers as a
disclosure document. A disclosure
document does not require either a
claim in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112,
¶2, or an inventor’s oath (or declaration)
under 35 U.S.C. 115, and is not
accorded a patent application filing
date. A disclosure document is to be
destroyed by the Office after two years
unless it is referred to in a separate
letter in a related provisional or
nonprovisional application filed within
those two years. The filing fee for a
disclosure document is $10. See 37 CFR
1.21(c).
The Office published a notice in
September of 1998 seeking input from
the general public on whether the Office
should eliminate the Disclosure
Document Program. See Changes to
Implement the Patent Business Goals,
63 FR 53498, 53527–28 (Oct. 5, 1998),
1215 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 87 (Oct. 27,
1998) (advance proposed rule). The
Office received a number of comments
supporting the elimination of the
Disclosure Document Program, but did
not receive any input from the
independent inventor community and,
therefore, decided to delay eliminating
the Disclosure Document Program. See
Changes to Implement the Patent
Business Goals, 64 FR 53772, 53776–77
(Oct. 4, 1998), 1215 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office
87 (Oct. 27, 1998) (proposed rule). The
Office has determined that it is now
appropriate to propose elimination of
the Disclosure Document Program
because, inter alia, independent
inventors have become more familiar
with and are using provisional
applications more often than they were
in 1998, and provisional applications
provide more protections for
independent inventors than disclosure
documents.
The Office implemented the
Disclosure Document Program in 1969
in order to provide an alternative form
of evidence of conception of an
invention to forms such as a ‘‘selfaddressed envelope’’ form of evidence.
See Disclosure Document Program, 34
FR 6003 (Apr. 2, 1969), 861 Off. Gaz.
Pat. Office 1 (May 6, 1969). Since June
of 1995, however, applicants have been
able to file a provisional application for
patent, which provides better benefits
and protection to inventors than a
disclosure document. A provisional
application must contain a specification
E:\FR\FM\06APP1.SGM
06APP1
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
17400
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules
in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶1,
and drawings, if drawings are necessary
to understand the invention described
in the specification. A provisional
application must name the inventors
and be accompanied by a separate cover
sheet identifying the papers as a
provisional application. The basic filing
fee for a provisional application by a
small entity is $100.00. See 37 CFR
1.16(d). A provisional application does
not require a claim under 35 U.S.C. 112,
¶2, or an inventor’s oath (or declaration)
under 35 U.S.C. 115. While a
nonprovisional application must be
filed within twelve months of the filing
date of a provisional application in
order for the inventor to claim the
benefit of the provisional application
under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), the file of a
provisional application is retained by
the Office for at least twenty years, or
longer if it is referenced in a patent or
patent application publication. With
respect to an invention claimed in a
nonprovisional application that is
entitled under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to the
benefit of a provisional application, the
provisional application is considered a
constructive reduction to practice of an
invention as of the filing date accorded
the application, if it describes the
invention in sufficient detail to enable
a person of ordinary skill in the art to
make and use the invention and
discloses the best mode known by the
inventor for carrying out the invention.
Thus, the disclosure requirements for a
provisional application are similar to
the disclosure requirements for a
disclosure document, and a provisional
application provides users with a filing
date without starting the patent term
period. Therefore, almost any papers
filed as a proper disclosure document
may also be filed as a provisional
application.
A provisional application is, however,
more valuable to an inventor than a
disclosure document. A provisional
application, just like a nonprovisional
application, establishes a constructive
reduction to practice date with respect
to an invention claimed in a
nonprovisional application that is
entitled under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to the
benefit of the provisional application
and disclosed in the provisional
application in the manner required by
35 U.S.C. 112, ¶1, and can be used
under the Paris Convention to establish
a priority date for foreign filing. A
disclosure document, however, may
only be used as evidence of a date of
conception of an invention under 35
U.S.C. 104. A disclosure document is
not a patent application and the filing
of a disclosure document does not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:19 Apr 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
establish a constructive reduction to
practice date for an invention described
therein. Thus, to use a disclosure
document to establish prior invention
under 35 U.S.C. 102(g) or under 37 CFR
1.131, an inventor may rely on the
disclosure document to demonstrate
that he or she conceived of the
invention first, but the inventor may
also be required to demonstrate that he
or she was reasonably diligent from a
date just prior to: (1) The date of
conception by the other party in an
interference proceeding; or (2) effective
date of a reference being used by the
Office to reject one or more claims of an
application until the inventor’s actual or
constructive reduction to practice. With
respect to an invention claimed in a
nonprovisional application that is
entitled under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to the
benefit of a provisional application and
disclosed in the provisional application
in the manner required by 35 U.S.C.
112, ¶1, however, the provisional
application may be used to establish a
constructive reduction to practice date
as of the filing date of the provisional
application.
Under 35 U.S.C. 102(b), any public
use or sale of an invention in the U.S.
or description of an invention in a
patent or a printed publication
anywhere in the world more than one
year prior to the filing of a patent
application on that invention will bar
the grant of a patent. In addition, many
foreign countries currently have what is
known as an ‘‘absolute novelty’’
requirement which means that a public
disclosure of an invention anywhere in
the world prior to the filing date of an
application for patent will act as a bar
to the granting of any patent directed to
the invention disclosed. Since a
disclosure document is not a patent
application, it does not help an inventor
avoid the forfeiture of U.S. or foreign
patent rights.
Discussion of Specific Rules
Title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 1, is proposed to be
amended as follows:
Section 1.21: Section 1.21(c) currently
sets forth a fee ($10.00) for filing a
disclosure document. Section 1.21 is
proposed to be amended to remove and
reserve paragraph (c) in view of the
proposed elimination of the Disclosure
Document Program.
Rule Making Considerations
Regulatory Flexibility Act
For the reasons set forth herein, the
Deputy General Counsel for General
Law of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office has certified to the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small
Business Administration that the
changes proposed in this notice will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). There is no
statutory provision relating to the
disclosure document program. The
program dates back to 1969, when
commercial services were not as
abundantly available. Now, there are
numerous commercially available
‘‘electronic notebooks’’ that may be used
to document evidence of conception of
an invention. In addition, inventors may
still use a ‘‘self-addressed envelope’’ to
mail documents to themselves or they
may maintain a logbook containing
fixed pages that may be witnessed to
document evidence of conception of an
invention. Thus, the program is no
longer necessary.
Executive Order 13132
This rule making does not contain
policies with federalism implications
sufficient to warrant preparation of a
Federalism Assessment under Executive
Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 1999).
Executive Order 12866
This rule making has been determined
to be not significant for purposes of
Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection
requirements being suspended by this
rule were approved in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
0651–0030 disclosure documents.
Suspension of the reporting
requirements under 0651–0030 is
expected to reduce the public reporting
burden by 4,445 hours and $236,000.
This proposed rule would thus not
impose any additional reporting or
record keeping requirements on the
public.
Interested persons are requested to
send comments to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget, New
Executive Office Building, Room 10202,
725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC
20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the
Patent and Trademark Office; and (2)
Robert J. Spar, Director, Office of Patent
Legal Administration, Commissioner for
Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA
22313–1450.
Notwithstanding any other provision
of law, no person is required to respond
to nor shall a person be subject to a
penalty for failure to comply with a
collection of information subject to the
requirements of the Paperwork
E:\FR\FM\06APP1.SGM
06APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 66 / Thursday, April 6, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Reduction Act unless that collection of
information displays a currently valid
OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and
procedure, Courts, Freedom of
Information, Inventions and patents,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, 37 CFR part 1 is proposed to
be amended as follows:
PART 1—RULES OF PRACTICE IN
PATENT CASES
1. The authority citation for 37 CFR
part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2).
2. Section 1.21 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph (c).
§ 1.21
Miscellaneous fees and charges.
*
*
*
*
(c) [Reserved]
*
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: March 29, 2006.
Jon W. Dudas,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual
Property and Director of the United States
Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. E6–4833 Filed 4–5–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–16–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 60
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–0199; FRL–8055–2]
RIN 2060–AL98
Alternative Work Practice To Detect
Leaks From Equipment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule amendment.
cchase on PROD1PC60 with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: Numerous EPA air pollution
standards require specific work
practices for equipment leak detection
and repair (LDAR). The current work
practice requires the use of a monitor
which meets required performance
specifications. This work practice is
based on 25-year-old technology. New
technology has been developed which
we believe provides equal, or better,
environmental protection than that
provided by the current work practice.
This action proposes a voluntary
alternative work practice (AWP) for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:38 Apr 05, 2006
Jkt 208001
finding leaking equipment using optical
gas imaging.
DATES: Comments. Submit comments on
or before June 5, 2006, or 30 days after
the date of any public hearing, if later.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the
EPA requesting to speak at a public
hearing by April 26, 2006, a public
hearing will be held on May 4, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2003–0199, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: Air Docket, EPA, Mailcode:
6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20460. Please
include a total of two copies.
• Hand Delivery: EPA, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Room B102,
Washington, DC 20460. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Docket’s
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions. Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2003–
0199. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by law.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The Web
site https://www.regulations.gov is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
17401
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket. All documents in the docket
are listed in https://www.regulations.gov.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by law. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in
hard copy form. Publicly available
docket materials are available either
electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air and Radiation
Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room
B102, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744, and the telephone number for
the Air and Radiation Docket is (202)
566–1742.
Public Hearing. If a public hearing is
held, it will begin at 10 a.m. and will
be held at the EPA facility complex in
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
or at an alternate facility nearby.
Persons interested in presenting oral
testimony or inquiring as to whether a
public hearing is to be held must
contact Mr. David Markwordt; Coatings
and Chemicals Group; Sector Policies
and Programs Division; EPA; Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone
(919) 541–0837.
For
additional information on the proposed
rule amendment, review the reports
listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section.
General and technical information.
Mr. David Markwordt, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, Sector
Policies and Programs Division,
Coatings and Chemicals Group (C439–
03), Environmental Protection Agency,
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina
27711, telephone (919) 541–0837,
facsimile number (919) 541–0942,
electronic mail (e-mail) address:
‘‘markwordt.david@epa.gov.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Regulated Entities. The regulated
categories and entities affected by the
proposed rule amendment include, but
are not limited to:
E:\FR\FM\06APP1.SGM
06APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 17399-17401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-4833]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 1
[Docket No.: PTO-P-2006-0005]
RIN 0651-AC01
Changes to Eliminate the Disclosure Document Program
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rule making.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office)
implemented the Disclosure Document Program in 1969 in order to provide
an alternative form of evidence of conception of an invention to, for
example, a ``self-addressed envelope'' containing a disclosure of an
invention. It appears, however, that few, if any, inventors obtain any
actual benefit from a disclosure document, and some inventors who use
the Disclosure Document Program believe that they are actually filing
an application for a patent. In addition, a provisional application for
patent affords better benefits and protection to inventors than a
disclosure document. Therefore, the Office is proposing to eliminate
the Disclosure Document Program.
Comment Deadline Date: To be ensured of consideration, written
comments must be received on or before May 8, 2006. No public hearing
will be held.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be sent by electronic mail message over the
Internet addressed to ddp.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 Catherine M.
Kirik. 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 via the
Office Internet Web site (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: Catherine M. Kirik, Office of the
Commissioner for Patents, by telephone at (571) 272-8040, 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-
0170, marked to the attention of Catherine M. Kirik.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: An inventor may file a disclosure document
with the Office which includes a written description and drawings of
his or her invention in sufficient detail to enable a person of
ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention to establish a
date of conception of an invention in the United States under 35 U.S.C.
104 prior to the application filing date. The inventor must sign the
disclosure document and include a separate signed cover letter
identifying the papers as a disclosure document. A disclosure document
does not require either a claim in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112, ]2,
or an inventor's oath (or declaration) under 35 U.S.C. 115, and is not
accorded a patent application filing date. A disclosure document is to
be destroyed by the Office after two years unless it is referred to in
a separate letter in a related provisional or nonprovisional
application filed within those two years. The filing fee for a
disclosure document is $10. See 37 CFR 1.21(c).
The Office published a notice in September of 1998 seeking input
from the general public on whether the Office should eliminate the
Disclosure Document Program. See Changes to Implement the Patent
Business Goals, 63 FR 53498, 53527-28 (Oct. 5, 1998), 1215 Off. Gaz.
Pat. Office 87 (Oct. 27, 1998) (advance proposed rule). The Office
received a number of comments supporting the elimination of the
Disclosure Document Program, but did not receive any input from the
independent inventor community and, therefore, decided to delay
eliminating the Disclosure Document Program. See Changes to Implement
the Patent Business Goals, 64 FR 53772, 53776-77 (Oct. 4, 1998), 1215
Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 87 (Oct. 27, 1998) (proposed rule). The Office
has determined that it is now appropriate to propose elimination of the
Disclosure Document Program because, inter alia, independent inventors
have become more familiar with and are using provisional applications
more often than they were in 1998, and provisional applications provide
more protections for independent inventors than disclosure documents.
The Office implemented the Disclosure Document Program in 1969 in
order to provide an alternative form of evidence of conception of an
invention to forms such as a ``self-addressed envelope'' form of
evidence. See Disclosure Document Program, 34 FR 6003 (Apr. 2, 1969),
861 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 1 (May 6, 1969). Since June of 1995, however,
applicants have been able to file a provisional application for patent,
which provides better benefits and protection to inventors than a
disclosure document. A provisional application must contain a
specification
[[Page 17400]]
in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 112, ]1, and drawings, if drawings are
necessary to understand the invention described in the specification. A
provisional application must name the inventors and be accompanied by a
separate cover sheet identifying the papers as a provisional
application. The basic filing fee for a provisional application by a
small entity is $100.00. See 37 CFR 1.16(d). A provisional application
does not require a claim under 35 U.S.C. 112, ]2, or an inventor's oath
(or declaration) under 35 U.S.C. 115. While a nonprovisional
application must be filed within twelve months of the filing date of a
provisional application in order for the inventor to claim the benefit
of the provisional application under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), the file of a
provisional application is retained by the Office for at least twenty
years, or longer if it is referenced in a patent or patent application
publication. With respect to an invention claimed in a nonprovisional
application that is entitled under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to the benefit of a
provisional application, the provisional application is considered a
constructive reduction to practice of an invention as of the filing
date accorded the application, if it describes the invention in
sufficient detail to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to
make and use the invention and discloses the best mode known by the
inventor for carrying out the invention. Thus, the disclosure
requirements for a provisional application are similar to the
disclosure requirements for a disclosure document, and a provisional
application provides users with a filing date without starting the
patent term period. Therefore, almost any papers filed as a proper
disclosure document may also be filed as a provisional application.
A provisional application is, however, more valuable to an inventor
than a disclosure document. A provisional application, just like a
nonprovisional application, establishes a constructive reduction to
practice date with respect to an invention claimed in a nonprovisional
application that is entitled under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) to the benefit of
the provisional application and disclosed in the provisional
application in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112, ]1, and can be
used under the Paris Convention to establish a priority date for
foreign filing. A disclosure document, however, may only be used as
evidence of a date of conception of an invention under 35 U.S.C. 104. A
disclosure document is not a patent application and the filing of a
disclosure document does not establish a constructive reduction to
practice date for an invention described therein. Thus, to use a
disclosure document to establish prior invention under 35 U.S.C. 102(g)
or under 37 CFR 1.131, an inventor may rely on the disclosure document
to demonstrate that he or she conceived of the invention first, but the
inventor may also be required to demonstrate that he or she was
reasonably diligent from a date just prior to: (1) The date of
conception by the other party in an interference proceeding; or (2)
effective date of a reference being used by the Office to reject one or
more claims of an application until the inventor's actual or
constructive reduction to practice. With respect to an invention
claimed in a nonprovisional application that is entitled under 35
U.S.C. 119(e) to the benefit of a provisional application and disclosed
in the provisional application in the manner required by 35 U.S.C. 112,
]1, however, the provisional application may be used to establish a
constructive reduction to practice date as of the filing date of the
provisional application.
Under 35 U.S.C. 102(b), any public use or sale of an invention in
the U.S. or description of an invention in a patent or a printed
publication anywhere in the world more than one year prior to the
filing of a patent application on that invention will bar the grant of
a patent. In addition, many foreign countries currently have what is
known as an ``absolute novelty'' requirement which means that a public
disclosure of an invention anywhere in the world prior to the filing
date of an application for patent will act as a bar to the granting of
any patent directed to the invention disclosed. Since a disclosure
document is not a patent application, it does not help an inventor
avoid the forfeiture of U.S. or foreign patent rights.
Discussion of Specific Rules
Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1, is proposed to
be amended as follows:
Section 1.21: Section 1.21(c) currently sets forth a fee ($10.00)
for filing a disclosure document. Section 1.21 is proposed to be
amended to remove and reserve paragraph (c) in view of the proposed
elimination of the Disclosure Document Program.
Rule Making Considerations
Regulatory Flexibility Act
For the reasons set forth herein, the Deputy General Counsel for
General Law of the United States Patent and Trademark Office has
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that the changes proposed in this notice will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). There is no statutory provision relating to the
disclosure document program. The program dates back to 1969, when
commercial services were not as abundantly available. Now, there are
numerous commercially available ``electronic notebooks'' that may be
used to document evidence of conception of an invention. In addition,
inventors may still use a ``self-addressed envelope'' to mail documents
to themselves or they may maintain a logbook containing fixed pages
that may be witnessed to document evidence of conception of an
invention. Thus, the program is no longer necessary.
Executive Order 13132
This rule making does not contain policies with federalism
implications sufficient to warrant preparation of a Federalism
Assessment under Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 1999).
Executive Order 12866
This rule making has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).
Paperwork Reduction Act
The information collection requirements being suspended by this
rule were approved in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under 0651-0030 disclosure documents. Suspension of the reporting
requirements under 0651-0030 is expected to reduce the public reporting
burden by 4,445 hours and $236,000. This proposed rule would thus not
impose any additional reporting or record keeping requirements on the
public.
Interested persons are requested to send comments to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget,
New Executive Office Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for the Patent and
Trademark Office; and (2) Robert J. Spar, Director, Office of Patent
Legal Administration, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450,
Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required
to respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to
comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements of
the Paperwork
[[Page 17401]]
Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Freedom of
Information, Inventions and patents, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Small businesses.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 37 CFR part 1 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 1--RULES OF PRACTICE IN PATENT CASES
1. The authority citation for 37 CFR part 1 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2).
2. Section 1.21 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (c).
Sec. 1.21 Miscellaneous fees and charges.
* * * * *
(c) [Reserved]
* * * * *
Dated: March 29, 2006.
Jon W. Dudas,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. E6-4833 Filed 4-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P