PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.For Further Action See H.R.2215.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 13, 2001
Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2001 - Amends Federal patent and trademark law, as amended by the Intellectual Property and Communications Omnibus Reform Act of 1999 (IPCORA) and the American Inventor's Protection Act (AIPA), to rename: (1) the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) the Commissioner of such Office; (2) the Commissioner for Patents the Assistant Commissioner for Patents; and (3) the Commissioner for Trademarks the Assistant Commissioner for Trademarks. Amends other specified law to reflect these changes. Makes technical corrections to other patent, copyright, and trademark laws.
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.
For Further Action See H.R.2215.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate concurred in House amendment with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text as Senate agreed to House amendment with amendment: CR S11926)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate concurred in House amendment with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text as Senate agreed to House amendment with amendment: CR S11926)
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S11926)
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
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. (text: CR H898-901)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H898-901)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 320.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H898-901)
Mr. Sensenbrenner moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 13.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 107-18.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 107-18.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 98 - 0. Record Vote Number: 12. (text: CR S1381-1384)
Senate roll call 12 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 98 - 0. Record Vote Number: 12.(text: CR S1381-1384)
Senate roll call 12 · Individual votesMeasure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S1376-1384)
Introduced in the Senate. Read twice. Ordered Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 13.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Mar 9, 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.320 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.320 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.320 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.320 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.