PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1191-1192)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 19, 2001
Patent Reexamination Enhancement Act of 2001 - Amends Federal patent law to allow any person, within 12 months after issuance of a patent, to file a request for an inter partes reexamination by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO): (1) on the basis of evidence that the invention was known or used by others in this country, or patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country, before the invention by the applicant for patent; (2) that the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country or in public use or on sale in this country, more than one year before the application for U.S. patent; (3) on the basis of (1) or (2) alone or in combination with a prior art citation to the PTO consisting of patents or printed publications which that person believes to have a bearing on the patentability of any claim of a particular patent; or (4) on the basis of evidence showing that one or more claims of the patent do not comply with certain patent application specification requirements (other than the best mode requirement).Requires such request to set forth reasons demonstrating a substantial new question of patentability exists in light of certain required conditions for patentability for each claim of the patent for which reexamination is requested.Sets a 12-month deadline for the PTO Director to determine whether a substantial new question of patentability affecting a claim is raised, on the grounds specified in this Act.Revises the estoppel of a third-party requester whose request for an inter partes reexamination results in a final decision favorable to the patentability of any original or proposed amended or new claim of the patent.Allows the assertion of invalidity based on newly discovered information unavailable to the third-party requester and the PTO, or upon evidence and reasons set forth in this Act which were not known to the third party requester at the time of such proceedings.Amends the Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999 to repeal the estoppel effect of an inter partes reexamination.
People & committees
Rep. Lofgren, Zoe [D-CA-16] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E1191-1192)
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 19, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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.
Analyze H.R.2231 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.
Examine H.R.2231 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.
Examine H.R.2231 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.
Examine H.R.2231 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.