PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Sep 19, 2012
Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012 - Amends federal patent law to implement the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs and the Patent Law Treaty. (Both treaties were ratified by the Senate on December 7, 2007.)
Allows any person who is a U.S. national, or has a domicile, habitual residence, or real and effective industrial or commercial establishment in the United States, to file an international design application for international registration with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) (thereby enabling U.S. applicants to file a single application with USPTO instead of separate applications in multiple countries).
Directs the USPTO to transmit international fees and forward international design applications to the international intergovernmental coordinating body.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires an international design application on an industrial design made in the United States to constitute the filing of an application in a foreign country if such application is filed: (1) in a country other than the United States, (2) at the international intergovernmental coordinating body recognized under the Hague Agreement, or (3) with an intergovernmental organization.
Sets forth the priorities of national and prior foreign and national applications.
Standardizes application procedures to be consistent with other member countries.
Extends the term for design patents from 14 to 15 years from the date of grant.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Dec 10, 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.6432 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.6432 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.6432 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.6432 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.