PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 28, 1994
Considers as nonobvious a process using or resulting in a product that is novel and nonobvious under provisions of Federal patent law if: (1) claims to the process and the product are contained in either the same patent application or in separate application having the same effective filing date; and (2) the product, and the process at the time it was invented, were owned by the same person or subject to an obligation of assignment to the same person. Requires a patent issued on such process to: (1) contain the claims to the product used in or made by that process; or (2) if such product is claimed in another patent, be set to expire on the same date as such other patent.
People & committees
Rep. Hughes, William J. [D-NJ-2] · D–NJ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Voice Vote.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2637 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2636 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
Amendment SP 2637 proposed by Senator Ford for Senator Hatch to Amendment SP 2636.
Amendment SP 2636 proposed by Senator Ford for Senator DeConcini.
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S14433-14434)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9281-9285)
Mr. Hughes moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 405.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-728.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 103-728.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended).
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and Judicial Administration.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Jan 16, 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.4307 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.4307 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.4307 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.4307 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.