35 U.S.C. § 182

Abandonment of invention for unauthorized disclosure

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 35 CasesGoogle Scholar

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.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1982–1982 · leading case: Constant v. United States, 1 Cl. Ct. 600 (Ct. Cl. 1982).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Constant v. United States, 1 Cl. Ct. 600 (Ct. Cl. 1982). · cites it 2× “During the time that the secrecy order was in force, plaintiff did not petition the Commissioner of Patents for a license to file foreign applications disclosing the ’557 invention, as provided by 35 U.S.C. § 182 and 37 C.F.R. § 5.5 . Following rescission of the secrecy order,…”

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.