To amend title 35, United States Code, to allow the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to accept late filings in certain cases of unintentional delay.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 29, 2007
Authorizes the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to accept any application or other filing made by an applicant for, or owner of, a patent or trademark after the applicable deadline, as the Director considers appropriate, if the applicant or owner files a petition within 30 days after such deadline showing that the delay was unintentional. Deems such a petition denied if the Director has not made a decision within 60 days. Provides that the Director's decision is not subject to judicial review.
Deems that the 30-day period to file a petition after the deadline begins on the date of enactment of this Act for trademark applicants or owners.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jan 16, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1778 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1778 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1778 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1778 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.