PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 104-41.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Aug 2, 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
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 104-41.
Became Public Law No: 104-41.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
A similar measure H.R. 587 was laid on the table without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H10097-10098)
Mr. Moorhead asked unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's table and consider.
Held at the desk.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Received in the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote. (consideration: CR S14569-14570)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Voice Vote.(consideration: CR S14569-14570)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 191.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Reported to Senate by Senator Hatch without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Star Print ordered on the bill.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S11207)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. 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 S.1111 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 S.1111 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 S.1111 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 S.1111 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.