Congress 111 - HR 628 - To establish a pilot program in certain United States district courts to encourage enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges.

Sponsor

Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA)

Cosponsors

Topics

Federal district courts Horticulture and plants Intellectual property Judges Law

Full Text

View Full Bill Text

Votes

Summary

(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the Senate on December 13, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Establishes a pilot program in certain U.S. district courts under which: (1) those district judges who request to hear cases involving patent or plant variety protection issues are designated by the chief judge to hear them; (2) such cases are randomly assigned to the district court judges, regardless of whether they are designated; (3) a judge not designated to whom such a case is assigned may decline to accept the case; and (4) a case so declined is randomly reassigned to one of those judges so designated.

Actions

Jan 4, 2011

Became Public Law No: 111-349.
Jan 4, 2011

Signed by President.
Dec 28, 2010

Presented to President.
Dec 17, 2010

Cleared for White House.
Dec 17, 2010

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Dec 17, 2010

On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 371 - 1 (Roll no. 651). (text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 12/16/2010 H8536-8537)
Dec 17, 2010

Resolving differences -- House actions: On motion that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 371 - 1 (Roll no. 651).(text as House agreed to Senate amendment: CR 12/16/2010 H8536-8537)
Dec 17, 2010

Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H8762-8763)
Dec 16, 2010

At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Ms. Chu objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
Dec 16, 2010

DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on the Senate amendment to H.R. 628.
Dec 16, 2010

Ms. Chu moved that the House suspend the rules and agree to the Senate amendment. (consideration: CR H8536-8539)
Dec 14, 2010

Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Dec 13, 2010

Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Dec 13, 2010

Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Dec 13, 2010

Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S8946-8947)
Dec 13, 2010

Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Mar 18, 2009

Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Mar 17, 2009

Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Mar 17, 2009

On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 409 - 7 (Roll no. 130). (text: CR H3456-3457)
Mar 17, 2009

Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by recorded vote (2/3 required): 409 - 7 (Roll no. 130).(text: CR H3456-3457)
Mar 17, 2009

Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H3471)
Mar 17, 2009

At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Issa objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
Mar 17, 2009

DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 628.
Mar 17, 2009

Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H3456-3459)
Mar 17, 2009

Mr. Johnson (GA) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Jan 22, 2009

Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Jan 22, 2009

Introduced in House

Amendments

Related Bills