[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 49 (Friday, March 13, 2026)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12405-12407]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2026-04901]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
[Docket No. PTO-C-2025-0018]
Request for Comments on the World Intellectual Property
Organization Riyadh Design Law Treaty
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) requests
input from all interested parties on the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO) Riyadh Design Law Treaty (RDLT) adopted by WIPO
Member States in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on November 22, 2024. In
particular, the USPTO welcomes written comments on whether the United
States should become a party to the RDLT and any impacts from doing so.
The provisions of the RDLT pertain generally to formalities associated
with applications for the protection of industrial designs, and more
specifically to streamlining the global system for protecting designs
and helping designers to more easily obtain protection for their
designs--both in home markets and abroad.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 11, 2026.
ADDRESSES: For reasons of government efficiency, comments should be
submitted through the Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. To submit comments via the portal, enter docket
number PTO-C-2025-0018 on the homepage and select ``Search.'' The site
will provide a search results page listing all documents associated
with this docket. Find a reference to this request for information and
select the ``Comment'' button, complete the required fields, and enter
or attach your comments. Attachments to electronic comments will be
accepted in ADOBE[supreg] portable document format or MICROSOFT
WORD[supreg] format. Because comments will be made available for public
inspection, information that the submitter does not desire to make
public, such as an address or phone number, should not be included.
Visit the Federal eRulemaking Portal (www.regulations.gov) for
additional instructions on providing comments via the portal. If
electronic submission of comments is not feasible due to a lack of
access to a computer and/or the internet, please submit comments by
First-Class Mail or Priority Mail to: Keith M. Mullervy, Patent
Attorney, Mail Stop OPIA, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, P.O. Box
1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith M. Mullervy, Patent Attorney,
Office of Policy and International Affairs (OPIA), at 571-272-7079.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
WIPO is a specialized United Nations agency based in Geneva,
Switzerland, that focuses on the promotion and protection of
intellectual property worldwide. The WIPO Standing Committee on the Law
of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT) is
a forum where WIPO Member States \1\ and accredited observers
facilitate coordination and provide guidance on the development of
international law on trademarks, industrial designs, and geographical
indications, including the harmonization of national laws and
procedures. Within the U.S. Government, the USPTO, based on authority
delegated by the U.S. Department of State, takes the lead in the WIPO
SCT among other Federal agencies and coordinates and develops U.S.
positions on issues before the WIPO SCT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ WIPO currently has 194 Member States. https://www.wipo.int/members/en/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At its Fifty-Fifth (30th Extraordinary) Session, held in Geneva on
July 14-22, 2022, the WIPO General Assembly decided to convene a
diplomatic conference to conclude and adopt a Design Law Treaty. The
diplomatic conference occurred on November 11-22, 2024, in Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia. On November 22, 2024, WIPO Member States adopted the
RDLT. The text of the RDLT is different in several respects from the
draft text that served as the starting point for negotiations at the
diplomatic conference. The draft text included draft Articles (known as
the ``Basic Proposal for the Design Law Treaty (DLT)''), https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sct/en/dlt_dc/dlt_dc_3.pdf) and draft
Regulations (known as the ``Basic Proposal for the Regulations under
the Design Law Treaty (DLT)''), https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sct/en/dlt_dc/dlt_dc_4.pdf). On March 27, 2024, following a Special Session
and Preparatory Committee meeting of the SCT, the USPTO requested
comments on the Basic Proposal for the DLT and the Basic Proposal for
the Regulations under the DLT. See Notice and Request for Comments,
WIPO Diplomatic Conference on the Design Law Treaty, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/03/27/2024-06390/wipo-diplomatic-conference-on-the-design-law-treaty. Comments received by
the USPTO helped inform positions taken by the United States at the
diplomatic conference.
The provisions of the RDLT pertain generally to formalities
associated with applications for the protection of industrial designs,
and more specifically to streamlining the global system for protecting
designs and helping designers to more easily obtain protection for
their designs--both in home markets and abroad. Similar treaties also
exist in the area of patents (Patent Law Treaty of 2000) and trademarks
(Trademark Law Treaty of 1994 and Singapore Treaty on the Law of
Trademarks of 2006).
Article 4 of the RDLT establishes a closed list of elements that a
Contracting Party may require in an industrial design application, such
as the name and address of an applicant, the name and address of an
applicant's representative (if any), a representation of the industrial
design, etc. The closed list outlines the maximum permissible set of
required elements and Contracting Parties are prohibited from requiring
additional elements not contained in this closed list. Based on this
maximum list of elements, an applicant who wishes to file an industrial
application
[[Page 12406]]
knows exactly what elements may be required by Contracting Parties.
Article 6 specifies a list of requirements that may be established
by a Contracting Party for the purpose of according a filing date of an
industrial design application. This provision establishes a minimal
list of filing date requirements, only including requirements that are
needed for an Office of a Contracting Party to properly determine
``who'' filed ``what.''
Article 7 mandates Contracting Parties provide for a 12-month grace
period that provides industrial design applicants an opportunity to
evaluate the value of the industrial design without worrying that a
disclosure of the industrial design, whether intentional or
inadvertent, will prevent registration of the design.
Articles 14, 15, and 16 provide applicants the ability to cure
certain procedural errors or missed deadlines. These relief measures
are critical to making the global industrial design system more
applicant-friendly, providing flexibility, and mitigating the
consequences of errors or mistakes in the application process. Without
relief measures, missing a deadline in the application process could
result in an inadvertent loss of rights, which, in the case of
industrial designs, can be irreparable.
Article 31 permits reservations on certain provisions of the RDLT,
including certain exceptions to mandatory representation, grace period,
deferred publication, restoration of priority right for a delayed
subsequent application, and the prohibition of any recording conditions
on rights a licensee may have regarding infringement proceedings. These
reservations were included to reach consensus in adopting the RDLT and
provide flexibility for Contracting Parties to tailor their
implementation of their obligations to their national design systems.
Generally, Contracting Parties wishing to make one or more declarations
under the RDLT will do so through a declaration accompanying the
instrument of ratification of, or accession to, the RDLT.
Among its 34 articles and 18 regulations, the RDLT covers several
other topics, including, definitions, general principles, industrial
design publication, electronic industrial design systems, and
requirements for representation before an Office of a Contracting
Party.
For additional context, the text of the RDLT can be found on the
WIPO website at: https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sct/en/dlt_dc/dlt_dc_26.pdf.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A corrigendum to the document containing the text of the
RDLT can further be found at https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sct/en/dlt_dc/dlt_dc_26_corr.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RDLT was open for signature for one year after its adoption
(i.e., up to November 21, 2025).\3\ The act of signing does not make a
Member State a party to or bound by the RDLT. Rather, signing qualifies
the signatory Member State to proceed to ratification, acceptance, or
approval and is a strong indication of intent to join the RDLT by the
signatory Member State.\4\ To become a party to the RDLT, a Member
State must undertake a separate step of ratification or accession.\5\
The United States is currently in the process of deciding whether it
wishes to join the RDLT, and will evaluate all relevant information,
including any responses to this notice and request for comment, as part
of that process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ According to WIPO, as of November 14, 2025, 28 WIPO Member
States have signed the RDLT: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Cabo
Verde, Central African Republic, Congo, Costa Rica, C[ocirc]te
d'Ivoire, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, El Salvador, Gabon,
Gambia, Ghana, Iceland, Indonesia, Lebanon, Morocco, Paraguay,
Philippines, Republic of Moldova, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi
Arabia, Sudan, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Uruguay, Uzbekistan,
Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
\4\ See, e.g., WIPO Press Release, WIPO Member States Adopt
Riyadh Design Law Treaty, November 22, 2024 (available at https://www.wipo.int/pressroom/en/articles/2024/article_0017.html).
\5\ See Riyadh Design Law Treaty, Articles 29-30. https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/sct/en/dlt_dc/dlt_dc_26.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The RDLT will enter into force three months after it is ratified or
acceded to by 15 eligible parties.\6\ Thereafter, RDLT provisions will
apply to any WIPO Member State that joins the RDLT (i.e., becomes a
Contracting Party to the RDLT). This means, for example, that the
RDLT's provisions will apply to all industrial design applications who
file an industrial design application in an office of a Contracting
Party, including those applicants who are nationals of, are domiciled
in, or have businesses in, countries that have not ratified or acceded
to the RDLT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ According to WIPO, as of November 14, 2025, no WIPO Member
States have ratified or acceded to the RDLT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Substantive Guidance on Comments
The USPTO welcomes any relevant written comments on the RDLT,
particularly on the specific text of the RDLT.
The USPTO is particularly interested in responses to the questions
below. However, commenters need not respond to every question and may
provide relevant information even if it is not responsive to a
particular question. Comments should be as detailed as possible and
provide all necessary information to enable an objective assessment of
the views expressed, including specific references to: laws,
regulations, and policy statements; executive, presidential, or other
orders; administrative, court or other determinations; and available
data (and associated methodology) regarding purported and potential
impacts of policy decisions. Because comments will be made available
for public inspection, information that the submitter does not desire
to make public, such as an address or phone number, should not be
included.
1. In your view, should the United States become a party to the
RDLT? In your response, please identify and explain your reasoning in
detail, including legal and policy considerations.
2. In your view, please explain whether the RDLT is consistent with
existing U.S. patent law. In your response, please explain your legal
reasoning and identify the provision(s) of the RDLT that you view as
consistent or inconsistent with U.S. patent law. Where possible, please
identify the relevant U.S. law or regulation.
3. If, in your view, the RDLT is inconsistent with existing U.S.
patent law, please identify and explain the change(s), if any, to U.S.
patent law necessary for compliance with the RDLT. In doing so, please
describe any impact(s) of adopting such changes. Where possible, please
identify the relevant U.S. law or regulation.
4. In your view, please explain whether the RDLT is consistent with
existing U.S. international obligations, including treaties, free trade
agreements, and other binding international agreement(s). In your
response, please explain your legal reasoning and identify any
provision(s) of the RDLT that you view as consistent or inconsistent
with specific U.S. international obligations. Where possible, please
identify the specific U.S. international obligation.
5. If the United States does not become a party to the RDLT, please
identify any RDLT provision(s) you believe should be incorporated into
U.S. patent law. In your response, please explain the reason(s) for and
any impact(s) of incorporating the identified provision(s) into U.S.
patent law.
6. In your view, please identify and explain any impact(s) of
implementing the RDLT in the United States on domestic and global
innovation, including U.S. science and innovation leadership.
[[Page 12407]]
7. In your view, please identify and explain any impact(s) of
implementing the RDLT in the United States on businesses, consumers,
investors, and the economy, including whether the RDLT would make the
United States safer, stronger, or more prosperous.
8. To the extent not already addressed in answering questions 6 and
7, in your view, please identify and explain any possible impact(s) of
implementing one or more of the following provisions of the RDLT in the
United States:
(a) industrial design application content requirements specified in
Article 4 of the RDLT and Rules 2 and 3 of the Regulations under the
RDLT;
(b) industrial design application filing date requirements
specified in Article 6 of the RDLT and Rule 5 of the Regulations under
the RDLT;
(c) grace period provisions regarding a disclosure of an industrial
design specified in Article 7 of the RDLT; and
(d) relief measures specified in Articles 14, 15, and 16 of the
RDLT, and Rules 10, 11, and 12 of the Regulations under the RDLT.
9. In your view, if the United States were to become a party to the
RDLT, should the United States declare one or more reservations via the
mechanism(s) identified in Article 31? If yes, please identify the one
or more RDLT provisions that you believe the United States should
declare a reservation for and the rationale for declaring the
respective reservation. If no, please identify the rationale for
declining to declare any reservations.
John A. Squires,
Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of
the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
[FR Doc. 2026-04901 Filed 3-12-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-16-P