U.S. Code » Title 35 » Part PART I— UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE › Chapter CHAPTER 1— ESTABLISHMENT, OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES, FUNCTIONS

35 U.S.C. § 11

Exchange of copies of patents and applications with foreign countries

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 35 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)In General.—The Director may exchange copies of specifications and drawings of United States patents and published applications for patents for those of foreign countries. The Director shall not enter into an agreement to provide such copies of specifications and drawings of United States patents and applications to a foreign country, other than a USMCA country or a WTO member country, without the express authorization of the Secretary of Commerce.(b)Definitions.—In this section—(1) the term “USMCA country” has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement Implementation Act (19 U.S.C. 4502); and(2) the term “WTO member country” has the meaning given that term in section 2(10) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(10)).(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 794, § 12; renumbered § 11 and amended Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §§ 4507(2), 4717(1), 4732(a)(10)(A), 4808], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–565, 1501A–580, 1501A–582, 1501A–591; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, §§ 13205(2)(B), 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1903, 1906; Pub. L. 116–260, div. O, title VI, § 602(d), Dec. 27, 2020, 134 Stat. 2153.)Historical and Revision Notes

Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §§ 15, and 78, part (Jan. 14, 1915, 38 Stat. 1221; Feb. 18, 1922, ch. 58, § 9, proviso in, 42 Stat. 393).

The first act mentioned applies to Canada only, the second to any country; these are consolidated in one section, specific reference to one country not being necessary.

Language is changed.

Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 11 was renumbered section 10 of this title.

Amendments

2020—Pub. L. 116–260 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a) and inserted heading, substituted “other than a USMCA country” for “other than a NAFTA country”, and substituted subsec. (b) for former third sentence which read as follows: “For purposes of this section, the terms ‘NAFTA country’ and ‘WTO member country’ have the meanings given those terms in section 104(b).”

2002—Pub. L. 107–273, § 13206(b)(1)(B), made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)]. See 1999 Amendment note below.

Pub. L. 107–273, § 13205(2)(B), made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4507(2)]. See 1999 Amendment note below.

1999—Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4808], inserted at end “The Director shall not enter into an agreement to provide such copies of specifications and drawings of United States patents and applications to a foreign country, other than a NAFTA country or a WTO member country, without the express authorization of the Secretary of Commerce. For purposes of this section, the terms ‘NAFTA country’ and ‘WTO member country’ have the meanings given those terms in section 104(b).”

Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)], as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, § 13206(b)(1)(B), substituted “Director” for “Commissioner”.

Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4717(1)], renumbered section 12 of this title as this section.

Pub. L. 106–113, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4507(2)], as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, § 13205(2)(B), inserted “and applications” after “patents” in section catchline and “and published applications for patents” after “patents” in text.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2020 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 116–260 effective July 1, 2020, see section 602(g) of div. O of Pub. L. 116–260, set out as a note under section 2578b of Title 19, Customs Duties.

Effective Date of 1999 Amendment

Amendment by section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4507(2)] of Pub. L. 106–113 effective Nov. 29, 2000, and applicable only to applications (including international applications designating the United States) filed on or after that date, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4508] of Pub. L. 106–113, as amended, set out as a note under section 10 of this title.

Amendment by section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §§ 4717(1), 4732(a)(10)(A)] of Pub. L. 106–113 effective 4 months after Nov. 29, 1999, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4731] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1944–1998 · leading case: Kingsland v. Dorsey, 338 U.S. 318 (1949).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kingsland v. Dorsey, 338 U.S. 318 (1949). · cites it 4× “Acting under the provisions of § 487 of the Revised Statutes ( 35 U. S. C. § 11 ), the Commissioner of Patents found after hearings that petitioner, an attorney, had been guilty of gross misconduct, and entered an order *319 barring him from practice before the United States…”
Cupples v. Marzall, 101 F. Supp. 579 (D.D.C. 1952). · cites it 6× “Cupples, against the Commissioner of Patents in dual aspect: (1) for mandamus to compel the Commissioner to admit the plaintiff to practice before the United States Patent Office, and (2) for review tinder 35 U.S.C.A. § 11 , as supplemented by Local Civil Rule 95, of the…”
Richard M. Franchi v. Harry F. Manbeck, Jr., Assistant Sec'y of Com. & Comm'r of Patents & Trademarks, 972 F.2d 1283 (Fed. Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “”) Fran-chi has not shown (nor even argued) that the district court abused its discretion in dismissing those portions of his complaint seeking relief in the nature of mandamus, and we see no such abuse.”
Exxon Chem. Patents, Inc. v. The Lubrizol Corp., 935 F.2d 1263 (Fed. Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “The patent statute does not require that patents shall be printed, although printing is authorized in 35 U.S.C. § 11 and printed copies are referred to in several provisions of Title 35.”
Edward S. Irons v. Robert Gottschalk, Comm'r of Patents, 548 F.2d 992 (D.C. Cir. 1977). “The provisions of the patent act itself permit the publication of patents that have been granted and the specifications and drawings of those patents, 35 U.S.C. § 11 (a)(1). We thus reserve for some later determination the question of whether § 122’s declaration of…”
Dorsey v. Kingsland, 173 F.2d 405 (D.C. Cir. 1949). · cites it 2× “[9] 35 U.S.C.A. § 11 (1936), based upon 42 Stat.”
United States ex rel. Laughlin v. Eicher, 56 F. Supp. 972 (D.D.C. 1944). “For examples of the latter see special jurisdiction over suits arising from Boulder Dam construction, 43 U.”
Pitney Bowes Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., 69 F. Supp. 2d 319 (D. Conn. 1998). “See 35 U.S.C. § 11 (Supp.1982) (effective February 27, 1983).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.