Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-603.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 14, 2015
Grace Period Restoration Act of 2015
Amends federal patent law to revise the one-year grace period under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) that prohibits certain pre-filing disclosures made during the year preceding the effective filing date of a claimed invention from being considered prior art that would make the claim ineligible for a patent based on lack of novelty or obvious subject matter grounds. (A disclosure that is prior art generally means that a patent cannot be issued for a claimed invention because the invention was already patented, described in a printed publication, in public use, on sale, available to the public, or described in an issued patent or a previously filed application.)
Prohibits an inventor's or any other person's pre-filing disclosure from barring the patentability of certain claims based on lack of novelty or obvious subject matter grounds if, before such disclosure and within the one-year period before the filing date, the claimed invention was already publicly disclosed in a printed publication by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the claimed invention from the inventor or a joint inventor. Allows an inventor who discloses an invention in a printed publication in such a manner in the year before filing a patent claim for the invention to remain entitled to the patent, regardless of any subsequent disclosures by third parties.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
Excludes certain disclosures from being considered prior art under the revised grace period.
Requires the amendments made by this Act to take effect as if enacted as part of the AIA.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.926 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.926 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.926 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.926 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.