[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 162 (Wednesday, October 26, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1940]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 SECTION 37 OF THE AMERICA INVENTS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR.

                              of michigan

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 26, 2011

  Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, last month, the President signed into law 
the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. I was a co-sponsor of a bipartisan 
amendment that added Section 37 to the House bill, which then passed 
the Senate and was enacted into law.
  Section 37 is an important provision that clarified the procedure for 
filing patent term extension applications under the Hatch-Waxman Act. 
It codified a sensible decision by a federal district judge and was 
meant to end years of confusion about this issue that had threatened to 
stifle innovation.
  Before the Senate voted on the House patent bill, an amendment was 
offered to strike Section 37. That amendment was fully debated and was 
defeated on a bipartisan basis. Last week, however, there was 
discussion of Section 37 on the floor of the Senate and it was 
suggested that Section 37 does not take effect for a year. But that is 
incorrect.
  Section 37 explicitly says that it ``shall apply'' to applications 
and court cases that are pending on the date of enactment of the bill. 
To apply to pending applications and cases, Section 37 obviously had to 
be effective immediately. Section 37 says very clearly exactly what it 
applies to so the default effective date provision for the Act does not 
apply here.
  During the entire debate over Section 37, not a single person 
suggested that Section 37 would not be effective immediately. In fact, 
everyone understood it would take effect right away and would govern 
currently pending applications and cases. The United States Patent and 
Trademark Office agreed with this interpretation. In fact, just last 
week, the Department of Justice explained in a court filing that this 
is the only possible interpretation of the law.
  In the end, the amendment to strike Section 37 was defeated during 
Senate debate. It is too late now to re-write history. And it is clear 
that Section 37 explicitly says that it is to be effective immediately.

                          ____________________