PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Laid on the table. See S. 1111 for further action.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 19, 1995
Provides that, upon timely election by the applicant for patent to proceed, a "biotechnological process" using or resulting in a composition of matter that is novel and nonobvious shall be considered nonobvious if: (1) claims to the process and the composition of matter are contained in either the same application for patent or in separate applications having the same effective filing date; and (2) the composition of matter 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. Specifies that a patent issued on such a process shall: (1) contain the claims to the composition of matter used in or made by that process; or (2) if such composition of matter is claimed in another patent, be set to expire on the same date as such other patent. Provides that, if a claim to a composition of matter is held invalid and that claim was the basis of a determination of nonobviousness under this Act, the process shall no longer be considered nonobvious solely on the basis of provisions of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Moorhead, Carlos J. [R-CA-27] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Laid on the table. See S. 1111 for further action.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H10095-10097)
Mr. Moorhead moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 90.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-178.
Reported by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 104-178.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E129)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.587 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.587 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.587 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.587 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.