ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

35 U.S.C. § 182 — Abandonment of invention for unauthorized disclosure

submitted 74 years ago by ch. 950 to r/title-35-PATENTS · 166 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

If an inventor breaks a secrecy order by publishing, disclosing, or filing a foreign patent application for the invention without the Commissioner's consent, the Commissioner of Patents can declare the invention abandoned as of that violation. The Commissioner needs the relevant agency heads' agreement before consenting to any disclosure. An abandonment forfeits all claims against the U.S. based on that invention.

If an invention covered by a secrecy order under section 181 is published, disclosed, or has a foreign patent application filed for it — without the Commissioner of Patents' consent — the Commissioner may declare the invention abandoned. This applies to the inventor, and to that person's successors, assigns, legal representatives, or anyone acting with them. The abandonment is treated as happening at the moment of the violation. The Commissioner cannot give consent to disclose without agreement from the heads of the agencies that caused the secrecy order. A finding of abandonment forfeits all claims against the United States based on that invention, for the applicant and anyone connected to them as described above.
the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

The invention disclosed in an application for patent subject to an order made pursuant to section 181 may be held abandoned upon its being established by the Commissioner of Patents that in violation of said order the invention has been published or disclosed or that an application for a patent therefor has been filed in a foreign country by the inventor, his successors, assigns, or legal representatives, or anyone in privity with him or them, without the consent of the Commissioner of Patents. The abandonment shall be held to have occurred as of the time of violation. The consent of the Commissioner of Patents shall not be given without the concurrence of the heads of the departments and the chief officers of the agencies who caused the order to be issued. A holding of abandonment shall constitute forfeiture by the applicant, his successors, assigns, or legal representatives, or anyone in privity with him or them, of all claims against the United States based upon such invention.

Source credit: (July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 806; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(B)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 335.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 1952Enacted · Act of July 19, 1952, ch. 950 · 66 Stat. 806
  • 1999Amended · Pub. L. 106-113 · 113 Stat. 1536, 1501
  • 2011Amended · Pub. L. 112-29 · 125 Stat. 335

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by ch. 950 on 1952-07-19.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case