PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 22, 2013
Stopping the Offensive Use of Patents Act or the STOP Act - Amends the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act to remove the eight-year sunset provision with respect to the transitional post-grant review program available to review the validity of covered business method patents, thereby making the program permanent.
Expands the term "covered business method patent" to include a patent that claims a method or corresponding apparatus for performing data processing or other operations used in the practice, administration, or management of any enterprise, product, or service, except technological inventions. (Current law limits the program to financial products or services.)
Requires the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) (the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property) to work with and support intellectual property law associations throughout the United States, within established pro bono programs, to assist financially under-resourced resellers, users, implementers, distributors, or customers of an allegedly infringing product or process.
People & committees
Rep. Issa, Darrell E. [R-CA-49] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet.
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.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.2766 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.2766 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.2766 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.2766 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.