HR 34
110th Congress
House
Law
Agriculture and Food
Congressional reporting requirements
Continuing education
District courts
Education
Governmental investigations
Higher education
Intellectual property
Judges
Judicial officers
Legal education
Patents
Plant breeding
Pretrial procedure
Seeds
To establish a pilot program in certain United States district courts to encourage enhancement of expertise in patent cases among district judges.
Introduced: January 4, 2007
Introduced by:
Issa, Darrell
Republican
· California
See on congress.gov
Everywhere this bill has been
10 steps
Introduced
In committee
Reported out
Passed House
Passed Senate
To President
Became law
Feb 13, 2007
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Feb 12, 2007
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
Feb 12, 2007
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1430)
Feb 12, 2007
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H1430)
Feb 12, 2007
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 34.
Feb 12, 2007
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1430-1433)
Feb 12, 2007
Mr. Berman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Feb 2, 2007
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property.
Jan 4, 2007
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Jan 4, 2007
Introduced in House
Plain-English summary
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. 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.
What's happening now
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Committees of jurisdiction
3