35 U.S.C. § 372 — National stage: Requirements and procedure

submitted 51 years ago by Pub. L. 94-131 to r/title-35-PATENTS · 152 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

When someone files an international patent application naming the United States, the Patent and Trademark Office reviews it like a regular national application. If the application started in another country, the Director can double-check its form and whether it covers just one invention, and can require a verified translation.

(a) All questions of substance, and — within what the treaty and its Regulations allow — all questions of procedure, in an international patent application that names the United States are decided the same way as for a regular application filed directly with the Patent and Trademark Office. (b) For an international application that names the United States but did not start here, three things may happen. (1) The Director may re-examine questions about the application's form and contents, staying within what the treaty and Regulations require. (2) The Director may re-examine, under section 121, whether the application improperly covers more than one invention, again staying within the treaty and Regulations. (3) If the application or any related document was filed in a language other than English, the Director may require a verified translation of it.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

(a)

All questions of substance and, within the scope of the requirements of the treaty and Regulations, procedure in an international application designating the United States shall be determined as in the case of national applications regularly filed in the Patent and Trademark Office.

(b)

In case of international applications designating but not originating in, the United States—

(1)

the Director may cause to be reexamined questions relating to form and contents of the application in accordance with the requirements of the treaty and the Regulations;

(2)

the Director may cause the question of unity of invention to be reexamined under section 121, within the scope of the requirements of the treaty and the Regulations; and

(3)

the Director may require a verification of the translation of the international application or any other document pertaining to the application if the application or other document was filed in a language other than English.

Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 94–131, § 1, Nov. 14, 1975, 89 Stat. 689; amended Pub. L. 98–622, title IV, §§ 402(e), (f), 403(a), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3392; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906; Pub. L. 112–29, § 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 335.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit

1975Enacted · Pub. L. 94-131 · 89 Stat. 689
1984Amended · Pub. L. 98-622 · 98 Stat. 3392
1999Amended · Pub. L. 106-113 · 113 Stat. 1536, 1501
2002Amended · Pub. L. 107-273 · 116 Stat. 1906
2011Amended · Pub. L. 112-29 · 125 Stat. 335

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 94-131 on 1975-11-14.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

no arguments yet — make the first case