[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 190 (Wednesday, September 30, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 61604-61608]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-18743]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Patent and Trademark Office

37 CFR Part 5

[Docket No. PTO-P-2019-0033]
RIN 0651-AD43


Facilitating the Use of the World Intellectual Property 
Organization's ePCT System To Prepare International Applications for 
Filing With the United States Receiving Office

AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of 
Commerce.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or 
Office) is amending the foreign filing license rules to facilitate the 
use of ePCT (a World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) online 
service) to prepare an international application for filing with the 
USPTO in its capacity as a Receiving Office (RO/US) under the Patent 
Cooperation Treaty (PCT). While the former foreign filing license rules 
authorized the export of technical data to ePCT for purposes of 
preparing an international application for filing in a foreign PCT 
Receiving Office, they did not authorize the export of technical data 
to ePCT for purposes of preparing an international application for 
filing with the RO/US. As a foreign filing license addresses the export 
of technical data, the USPTO is amending the foreign filing license 
rules to further provide that a foreign filing license from the USPTO 
authorizes the export of technical data abroad for purposes related to 
the use of ePCT to prepare an international application for filing with 
the RO/US under the PCT.

DATES: This final rule is effective on September 30, 2020.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Neas, Deputy Director, 
International Patent Legal Administration, at 571-272-3289, or Boris 
Milef, Senior Legal Examiner, International Patent Legal 
Administration, at 571-272-3288.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Executive Summary: Purpose: The rules of 
practice in 37 CFR part 5 are amended to expand the scope of a foreign 
filing license from the USPTO to allow U.S. applicants to use WIPO's 
ePCT web-based service to help prepare their international applications 
for filing with the RO/US, as they are already permitted to do for 
filing with foreign ROs.
    Summary of Major Provisions: Under former 37 CFR 5.11(b), a foreign 
filing license from the Commissioner for Patents authorized the export 
of technical data abroad for purposes related to the preparation, 
filing or possible filing, and prosecution of a foreign application, 
including an international application for filing in a PCT Receiving 
Office other than the RO/US. See 37 CFR 5.1(b)(2). Former 37 CFR 5.11 
did not authorize the export of technical data abroad for purposes 
related to the preparation of an international application for filing 
with the RO/US. As a foreign filing license addresses the export of 
technical data, the provisions of 37 CFR 5.11(b) are amended to further 
provide that a foreign filing license from the Commissioner for Patents 
authorizes the export of technical data abroad for purposes related to 
the use of WIPO's online service for preparing an international 
application for filing with the RO/US.
    Costs and Benefits: This rulemaking is not economically significant 
under Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).
    Background: The notice of proposed rulemaking, published January 
30, 2020 (85 FR 5362), provides background information on this 
rulemaking. That information is not repeated here.
    This final rule updates the foreign filing license rules to provide 
that a foreign filing license from the USPTO, which are routinely 
applied for and granted as a matter of course in new application 
filings, would authorize the export of technical data abroad for 
purposes relating to the use of ePCT to prepare an international 
application for filing with the USPTO in its capacity as a Receiving 
Office under the PCT.
    Applicants who are residents and/or nationals of the United States 
and its territories can file international applications directly with 
the Receiving Office of the International Bureau via ePCT or other 
means, provided that any national security provisions have been met 
prior to filing, including obtaining any required foreign filing 
license. See 37 CFR 5.11 and Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 140. 
The provisions of former 37 CFR 5.11(b) authorized U.S. applicants 
having a foreign filing license to export technical data abroad to 
servers located outside the United States hosting ePCT to prepare 
international applications for filing with the International Bureau as 
a Receiving Office, without having to separately comply with the 
regulations contained in 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (International 
Traffic in Arms Regulations of the Department of State), 15 CFR parts 
730 through 774 (Export Administration Regulations of the Bureau of 
Industry and Security, Department of Commerce), and 10 CFR part 810 
(Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities Regulations of the 
Department of Energy). Id. The provisions of former 37 CFR 5.11(b), 
however, did not authorize the export of technical data to such servers 
for the purpose of preparing international applications for filing with 
the RO/US.
    The provisions of former 37 CFR 5.11(b) were last revised prior to 
the date the RO/US began accepting international applications prepared 
using ePCT and thus did not address whether applicants having a foreign 
filing license from the USPTO could use ePCT to prepare an 
international application for filing with the RO/US. Therefore, the 
USPTO updates the regulations in this final rule to permit applicants 
having a foreign filing license from the USPTO to use ePCT to prepare 
an international application for filing with the RO/US without having 
to

[[Page 61605]]

separately comply with the regulations set forth in 37 CFR 5.11(b).

Discussion of Specific Rules

    The following is a discussion of the amendments to 37 CFR part 5.
    Section 5.1: Section 5.1(b)(2) is amended to change the text 
``foreign patent office, foreign patent agency, or international 
agency'' to ``foreign or international intellectual property 
authority,'' for consistency, as the term ``intellectual property 
authority'' is generally used in the patent statutes and other patent 
rules. See, e.g., 35 U.S.C. 111(c) and 119(b)(1) and (b)(3), and 37 CFR 
1.55, 1.57(a), and 1.76(b)(6).
    Section 5.11: Section 5.11(a) is amended to change the text 
``foreign patent office, foreign patent agency, or any international 
agency'' to ``foreign or international intellectual property 
authority,'' consistent with the change to Sec.  5.1(b)(2).
    Section 5.11(b) is amended to provide that a license from the 
Commissioner for Patents under 35 U.S.C. 184 referred to in Sec.  
5.11(a) (``foreign filing license'') would additionally authorize the 
export of technical data abroad for purposes related to the use of a 
WIPO online service for preparing an international application for 
filing with the RO/US under the PCT.
    The amendment would authorize applicants having a foreign filing 
license from the USPTO to use ePCT to prepare an international 
application for filing with the RO/US without having to separately 
comply with the regulations identified in Sec.  5.11(b), i.e., the 
regulations contained in 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (International 
Traffic in Arms Regulations of the Department of State), 15 CFR parts 
730 through 774 (Export Administration Regulations of the Bureau of 
Industry and Security, Department of Commerce), and 10 CFR part 810 
(Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities Regulations of the 
Department of Energy).
    Section 5.11(e)(3) is amended to change ``foreign patent 
application'' to ``foreign application'' for consistency with the 
definition of foreign application in Sec.  5.1(b)(2).
    Section 5.12: Section 5.12(a) is amended to clarify that for an 
application on an invention made in the United States to be considered 
to include a petition for license under 35 U.S.C. 184, the application 
must be filed in the USPTO. An application that is filed abroad on an 
invention made in the United States but that comes to the United States 
for examination, for example, in the case of an international design 
application designating the United States that is filed abroad, would 
not be considered to include a petition for a foreign filing license. 
Where an application was filed abroad through error without the 
required license under Sec.  5.11 first having been obtained, 
applicants should consider filing a petition for retroactive license 
under Sec.  5.25.
    Section 5.15: Section 5.15(a) is amended for clarity to include a 
reference to Sec.  5.11(b) concerning the export of technical data. In 
addition, ``foreign patent agency or international patent agency'' is 
changed to ``foreign or international intellectual property 
authority.'' See discussion of Sec.  5.1(b)(2), supra. Section 5.15(a) 
is also amended to clarify that the grant of the license also covers 
material submitted under Sec.  5.13, where there is no corresponding 
U.S. application.
    Paragraphs (b) and (e) of Sec.  5.15 are amended consistent with 
the amendments to Sec.  5.15(a).
    Comments and Responses to Comments: The USPTO published a notice of 
proposed rulemaking on January 30, 2020, proposing to change the rules 
of practice to facilitate the use of WIPO's ePCT system for U.S. 
applicants. See Facilitating the Use of WIPO's ePCT System To Prepare 
International Applications for Filing With the United States Receiving 
Office, 85 FR 5362 (Jan. 30, 2020). The USPTO received three comments 
from five submitters--more particularly, from a law firm, individual 
patent practitioners, and the general public--in response to the notice 
of proposed rulemaking. The summarized comments and the USPTO's 
responses to those comments follow:
    Comment 1: While all the written submissions received supported the 
proposed rule changes, several submitters also requested that the USPTO 
expressly state, in this final rule, that the warnings set forth in the 
notice titled Use of WIPO's ePCT System for Preparing the PCT Request 
for Filing as Part of an International Application with the USPTO as 
Receiving Office, 81 FR 27417 (May 6, 2016) (hereafter ``2016 notice'') 
no longer apply. Those comments explained that such a statement would 
help in training and outreach efforts to encourage the use of ePCT, 
which, in turn, would benefit applicants, patent practitioners, and 
offices.
    Response: The USPTO agrees that as a result of this rulemaking, the 
warning in the 2016 notice regarding exporting subject matter, pursuant 
to a foreign filing license from the USPTO, into ePCT for preparing an 
international application for filing with the RO/US no longer applies. 
However, applicants are cautioned that the warnings in the 2016 notice 
are still applicable in the limited situations where the applicant 
either does not have a foreign filing license or would be exporting 
additional subject matter not included within the scope of the foreign 
filing license from the USPTO.
    Comment 2: Several submitters requested the USPTO develop a 
mechanism to facilitate updating bibliographic data in PCT 
applications, similar to the mechanism available through ePCT.
    Response: The USPTO notes the request to develop a mechanism to 
facilitate updating of bibliographic data in PCT applications. While 
such a mechanism would provide some benefits to PCT users, the process 
for evaluating and prioritizing information technology projects within 
the USPTO is beyond the scope of this final rule. The USPTO intends to 
consider the request raised in the comment through the appropriate 
internal process.
    Comment 3: One submitter, while supporting the proposed rule 
changes stated that the changes would make it easier for foreign filers 
to file their PCT applications in the United States, and said that this 
was necessary because U.S. inventors already have this benefit when 
filing a PCT application in the other member states.
    Response: The commenter appears to have misunderstood the purpose 
of this rule. The revised rules change neither who may file a PCT 
application with the RO/US, nor who may represent such applicants 
before the RO/US. See 35 U.S.C. 361 and Sec.  1.421 regarding who may 
file a PCT application with the RO/US, and Sec.  1.455 regarding who 
may represent a PCT applicant before the USPTO.

Rulemaking Considerations

    A. Administrative Procedure Act: This document makes changes to the 
rules of practice to facilitate the use of WIPO's ePCT system to 
prepare international applications for filing with the RO/US. The 
changes being made in this document do not change the substantive 
criteria of patentability. These changes involve rules of agency 
practice and procedure, and/or interpretive rules. See Bachow Commc'ns 
Inc. v. FCC, 237 F.3d 683, 690 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (rules governing an 
application process are procedural under the Administrative Procedure 
Act); Inova Alexandria Hosp. v. Shalala, 244 F.3d 342, 350 (4th Cir. 
2001) (rules for handling appeals are procedural where they do not 
change the substantive standard for reviewing claims); Nat'l Org. of 
Veterans' Advocates v. Sec'y of Veterans Affairs,

[[Page 61606]]

260 F.3d 1365, 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2001) (rule that clarifies 
interpretation of a statute is interpretive).
    Accordingly, prior notice and opportunity for public comment for 
these changes are not required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) or (c) (or 
any other law). See Cooper Techs. Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 1336-37 
(Fed. Cir. 2008) (stating that 5 U.S.C. 553, and thus 35 U.S.C. 
2(b)(2)(B), do not require notice and comment rulemaking for 
``interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of 
agency organization, procedure, or practice'') (quoting 5 U.S.C. 
553(b)(A)). The USPTO, however, published the proposed changes for 
comment because it sought the benefit of the public's views on the 
USPTO's implementation of the proposed rule changes.
    B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: For the reasons set forth herein, 
the Senior Counsel for Regulatory and Legislative Affairs in the Office 
of General Law of the USPTO has certified to the Chief Counsel for 
Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that changes in this 
document will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
    The changes made in this document will facilitate the use of WIPO's 
ePCT system to prepare international applications for filing with the 
RO/US and will apply to any entity, including a small or micro entity, 
that uses ePCT to prepare an international patent application under the 
PCT for filing with the RO/US. The changes made in this document will 
not result in a change in the burden imposed on any patent applicant, 
including a small entity.
    For the foregoing reasons, the changes made in this document will 
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities.
    C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review): This 
rulemaking has been determined to be not significant for purposes of 
Executive Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).
    D. Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory 
Review): The USPTO has complied with Executive Order 13563. 
Specifically, the USPTO has, to the extent feasible and applicable: (1) 
Made a reasoned determination that the benefits justify the costs of 
the rule; (2) tailored the rule to impose the least burden on society 
consistent with obtaining the regulatory objectives; (3) selected a 
regulatory approach that maximizes net benefits; (4) specified 
performance objectives; (5) identified and assessed available 
alternatives; (6) involved the public in an open exchange of 
information and perspectives among experts in relevant disciplines, 
affected stakeholders in the private sector, and the public as a whole, 
and provided online access to the rulemaking docket; (7) attempted to 
promote coordination, simplification, and harmonization across 
government agencies and identified goals designed to promote 
innovation; (8) considered approaches that reduce burdens and maintain 
flexibility and freedom of choice for the public; and (9) ensured the 
objectivity of scientific and technological information and processes.
    E. Executive Order 13771 (Reducing Regulation and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs): This final rule is not expected to be an Executive 
Order 13771 regulatory action because the final rule would not be 
significant under Executive Order 12866.
    F. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism): This rulemaking does not 
contain policies with federalism implications sufficient to warrant 
preparation of a Federalism Assessment under Executive Order 13132 
(Aug. 4, 1999).
    G. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation): This rulemaking 
will not: (1) Have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian 
tribes; (2) impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian tribal 
governments; or (3) preempt tribal law. Therefore, a tribal summary 
impact statement is not required under Executive Order 13175 (Nov. 6, 
2000).
    H. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects): This rulemaking is not a 
significant energy action under Executive Order 13211 because this 
rulemaking is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the 
supply, distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement of 
Energy Effects is not required under Executive Order 13211 (May 18, 
2001).
    I. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform): This rulemaking 
meets applicable standards to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, 
and reduce burden as set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 
Executive Order 12988 (Feb. 5, 1996).
    J. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children): This rulemaking 
does not concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may 
disproportionately affect children under Executive Order 13045 (Apr. 
21, 1997).
    K. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property): This 
rulemaking will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise 
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 1988).
    L. Congressional Review Act: Under the Congressional Review Act 
provisions of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 
1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), prior to issuing any final rule, the USPTO 
will submit a report containing the final rule and other required 
information to the United States Senate, the United States House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the Government 
Accountability Office. The changes in this document are not expected to 
result in an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more; a 
major increase in costs or prices; or significant adverse effects on 
competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the 
ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises in domestic and export markets. Therefore, this 
document is not expected to result in a ``major rule'' as defined in 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).
    M. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995: The changes set forth in 
this document do not involve a Federal intergovernmental mandate that 
will result in the expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, 
in the aggregate, of $100 million (as adjusted) or more in any one 
year, or a Federal private sector mandate that will result in the 
expenditure by the private sector of $100 million (as adjusted) or more 
in any one year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments. Therefore, no actions are necessary under the provisions 
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
    N. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969: This rulemaking will 
not have any effect on the quality of the environment and is thus 
categorically excluded from review under the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969. See 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
    O. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995: The 
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) are not applicable because 
this rulemaking does not contain provisions that involve the use of 
technical standards.
    P. Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 
1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) requires that the USPTO consider the 
impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on 
the public. This rulemaking involves information collection 
requirements that are subject to review by Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995

[[Page 61607]]

(44 U.S.C. 3501-3549). The collection of information involved in this 
rulemaking has been reviewed and previously approved by OMB under 
control number 0651-0021. This rulemaking does not impose any 
additional collection requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act 
that are subject to further review by OMB. The collections of 
information already approved under control number 0651-0021 support the 
actions proposed in this rulemaking. Therefore, no changes are required 
in the collection.
    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required 
to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure 
to comply with a collection of information subject to the requirements 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information 
displays a currently valid OMB control number.

List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 5

    Classified information, Exports, Foreign relations, Inventions and 
patents.

    For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 37 CFR part 5 is amended 
as follows:

PART 5--SECRECY OF CERTAIN INVENTIONS AND LICENSES TO EXPORT AND 
FILE APPLICATIONS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES

0
1. The authority citation for 37 CFR part 5 is revised to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2), 41, 181-188; 22 U.S.C. 2751 et 
seq.; 42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 3201 et seq.; and the 
delegations to the Director in 15 CFR 370.10(j), 22 CFR 125.04, and 
10 CFR 810.7.


0
2. Section 5.1 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(2) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  5.1  Applications and correspondence involving national security.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (2) Foreign application as used in this part includes, for filing 
in a foreign country or in a foreign or international intellectual 
property authority (other than the United States Patent and Trademark 
Office acting as a Receiving Office for international applications (35 
U.S.C. 361, 37 CFR 1.412) or as an office of indirect filing for 
international design applications (35 U.S.C. 382, 37 CFR 1.1002)) any 
of the following: An application for patent; international application; 
international design application; or application for the registration 
of a utility model, industrial design, or model.
* * * * *

0
3. Section 5.11 is amended by revising paragraphs (a), (b), and (e)(3) 
introductory text to read as follows:


Sec.  5.11  License for filing in, or exporting to, a foreign country 
an application on an invention made in the United States or technical 
data relating thereto.

    (a) A license from the Commissioner for Patents under 35 U.S.C. 184 
is required before filing any application for patent, including any 
modifications, amendments, or supplements thereto or divisions thereof, 
or for the registration of a utility model, industrial design, or 
model, in a foreign country or in a foreign or international 
intellectual property authority (other than the United States Patent 
and Trademark Office acting as a Receiving Office for international 
applications (35 U.S.C. 361, 37 CFR 1.412) or as an office of indirect 
filing for international design applications (35 U.S.C. 382, 37 CFR 
1.1002)), if the invention was made in the United States, and:
    (1) An application on the invention has been filed in the United 
States less than six months prior to the date on which the application 
is to be filed; or
    (2) No application on the invention has been filed in the United 
States.
    (b) The license from the Commissioner for Patents referred to in 
paragraph (a) of this section would also authorize the export of 
technical data abroad for purposes related to:
    (1) The preparation, filing or possible filing, and prosecution of 
a foreign application; and
    (2) The use of a World Intellectual Property Organization online 
service for preparing an international application for filing with the 
United States Patent and Trademark Office acting as a Receiving Office 
(35 U.S.C. 361, 37 CFR 1.412) without separately complying with the 
regulations contained in 22 CFR parts 120 through 130 (International 
Traffic in Arms Regulations of the Department of State), 15 CFR parts 
730 through 774 (Export Administration Regulations of the Bureau of 
Industry and Security, Department of Commerce), and 10 CFR part 810 
(Assistance to Foreign Atomic Energy Activities Regulations of the 
Department of Energy).
* * * * *
    (e) * * *
    (3) For subsequent modifications, amendments, and supplements 
containing additional subject matter to, or divisions of, a foreign 
application if:
* * * * *

0
4. Section 5.12 is amended by revising paragraph (a) and removing the 
parenthetical authority at the end of the section to read as follows:


Sec.  5.12  Petition for license.

    (a) Filing of an application in the United States Patent and 
Trademark Office on an invention made in the United States will be 
considered to include a petition for license under 35 U.S.C. 184 for 
the subject matter of the application. The filing receipt or other 
official notice will indicate if a license is granted. If the initial 
automatic petition is not granted, a subsequent petition may be filed 
under paragraph (b) of this section.
* * * * *

0
5. Section 5.15 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) introductory 
text, (a)(1), (b), and (e) to read as follows:


Sec.  5.15  Scope of license.

    (a) Applications or other materials reviewed pursuant to Sec. Sec.  
5.12 through 5.14, which were not required to be made available for 
inspection by defense agencies under 35 U.S.C. 181, will be eligible 
for a license of the scope provided in this paragraph (a). This license 
permits subsequent modifications, amendments, and supplements 
containing additional subject matter to, or divisions of, a foreign 
application, if such changes to the application do not alter the 
general nature of the invention in a manner that would require the 
United States application to have been made available for inspection 
under 35 U.S.C. 181. Grant of this license authorizes the export of 
technical data pursuant to Sec.  5.11(b) and the filing of an 
application in a foreign country or with any foreign or international 
intellectual property authority when the technical data and the subject 
matter of the foreign application correspond to that of the application 
or other materials reviewed pursuant to Sec. Sec.  5.12 through 5.14, 
upon which the license was granted. This license includes the 
authority:
    (1) To export and file all duplicate and formal application papers 
in foreign countries or with foreign or international intellectual 
property authorities;
* * * * *
    (b) Applications or other materials that were required to be made 
available for inspection under 35 U.S.C. 181 will be eligible for a 
license of the scope provided in this paragraph (b). Grant of this 
license authorizes the export of technical data pursuant to Sec.  
5.11(b) and the filing of an application in a foreign country or with 
any foreign or international intellectual property authority. Further, 
this license includes the authority to export and file all duplicate 
and formal papers in foreign countries or with foreign or

[[Page 61608]]

international intellectual property authorities and to make amendments, 
modifications, and supplements to; file divisions of; and take any 
action in the prosecution of the foreign application, provided subject 
matter additional to that covered by the license is not involved.
* * * * *
    (e) Any paper filed abroad or transmitted to a foreign or 
international intellectual property authority following the filing of a 
foreign application that changes the general nature of the subject 
matter disclosed at the time of filing in a manner that would require 
such application to have been made available for inspection under 35 
U.S.C. 181 or that involves the disclosure of subject matter listed in 
paragraph (a)(3)(i) or (ii) of this section must be separately licensed 
in the same manner as a foreign application. Further, if no license has 
been granted under Sec.  5.12(a) after filing the corresponding United 
States application, any paper filed abroad or with a foreign or 
international intellectual property authority that involves the 
disclosure of additional subject matter must be licensed in the same 
manner as a foreign application.
* * * * *

    Dated: August 19, 2020.
Andrei Iancu,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of 
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2020-18743 Filed 9-29-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P