FEDERAL · 35 U.S.C. · Chapter 13

Civil action to obtain patent

35 U.S.C. § 145
Title35Patents
Chapter13 — REVIEW OF PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE DECISIONS

This text of 35 U.S.C. § 145 (Civil action to obtain patent) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
35 U.S.C. § 145.

Text

An applicant dissatisfied with the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an appeal under section 134(a) may, unless appeal has been taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, have remedy by civil action against the Director in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia if commenced within such time after such decision, not less than sixty days, as the Director appoints. The court may adjudge that such applicant is entitled to receive a patent for his invention, as specified in any of his claims involved in the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as the facts in the case may appear and such adjudication shall authorize the Director to issue such patent on compliance with the requirements of law. All the expenses of t

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Dystar Textilfarben Gmbh & Co Deutschland Kg v. C.H. Patrick, Co.
464 F.3d 1356 (Federal Circuit, 2006)
109 case citations
Harrow v. Department of Defense
601 U.S. 480 (Supreme Court, 2024)
47 case citations
Century Distilling Co. v. Continental Distilling Corp. (Two Cases)
205 F.2d 140 (Third Circuit, 1953)
38 case citations
Hyatt v. Dudas
492 F.3d 1365 (Federal Circuit, 2007)
23 case citations
Frederick F. Glass v. William C. De Roo
239 F.2d 402 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1956)
22 case citations
Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. Doll
561 F.3d 1372 (Federal Circuit, 2009)
18 case citations
Hyatt v. Director, Patent and Trademark Office
551 F.3d 1307 (Federal Circuit, 2008)
17 case citations
Edwin L. Reynolds, Acting Commissioner of Patents v. Elie P. Aghnides
356 F.2d 367 (D.C. Circuit, 1966)
16 case citations
United Sweetener USA, Inc. v. Nutrasweet Co.
766 F. Supp. 212 (D. Delaware, 1991)
15 case citations
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents
349 F.2d 710 (D.C. Circuit, 1965)
10 case citations
Berenter v. Quigg
737 F. Supp. 5 (District of Columbia, 1988)
7 case citations
Innovatit Seafood Systems v. Commissioner for Patents
240 F.R.D. 23 (District of Columbia, 2007)
5 case citations
Avedis Zildjian Co. v. Fred Gretsch Mfg. Co.
147 F. Supp. 614 (E.D. New York, 1956)
5 case citations
Kollsman v. Ladd
226 F. Supp. 186 (District of Columbia, 1964)
5 case citations
Old Charter Distillery Co. v. Continental Distilling Corp.
138 F. Supp. 473 (D. Delaware, 1956)
2 case citations
Multifastener Corp. v. Ladd
229 F. Supp. 46 (District of Columbia, 1964)
2 case citations
Aubrey L. Jones v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents
235 F.2d 22 (D.C. Circuit, 1956)
1 case citations
Ruskin v. Watson
123 F. Supp. 33 (District of Columbia, 1954)
1 case citations
Lange v. Commissioner of Patents
352 F. Supp. 116 (District of Columbia, 1972)
1 case citations

Source Credit

History

(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 803; Pub. L. 97–164, title I, §163(a)(7), Apr. 2, 1982, 96 Stat. 49; Pub. L. 98–622, title II, §203(b), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3387; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §§4605(e), 4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–571, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, §13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906; Pub. L. 112–29, §§3(j)(1), 9(a), 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 290, 316, 335.)

Editorial Notes

Historical and Revision Notes
Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., §63 (R.S. 4915, amended (1) Mar. 2, 1927, ch. 273, §11, 44 Stat. 1336, (2) Mar. 2, 1929, ch. 488, §2(b), 45 Stat. 1476, (3) Aug. 5, 1939, ch. 451, §4, 53 Stat. 1212).
Bill in equity is changed to civil action and the section is restricted to exclude interferences which are covered by the next section. The time for filing the action is changed to the same as the time for appeal. The requirement for the applicant to file a copy of the decision in the Patent Office is omitted.
Language is changed.

Editorial Notes

Amendments
2011—Pub. L. 112–29, §20(j), struck out "of this title" after "134(a)".
Pub. L. 112–29, §9(a), substituted "United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia" for "United States District Court for the District of Columbia".
Pub. L. 112–29, §3(j)(1), substituted "Patent Trial and Appeal Board" for "Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences" in two places.
2002—Pub. L. 107–273 made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4732(a)(10)(A)]. See 1999 Amendment note below.
1999—Pub. L. 106–113, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4732(a)(10)(A)], as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, substituted "Director" for "Commissioner" wherever appearing.
Pub. L. 106–113, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4605(e)], inserted "(a)" after "section 134".
1984—Pub. L. 98–622 substituted "Patent Appeals and Interferences in an appeal under section 134 of this title may," for "Appeals may" in first sentence and "Patent Appeals and Interferences" for "Appeals" in second sentence.
1982—Pub. L. 97–164 substituted "Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit" for "Court of Customs and Patent Appeals".

Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries

Effective Date of 2011 Amendment
Amendment by section 3(j)(1) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 18-month period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to certain applications for patent and any patents issuing thereon, see section 3(n) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as an Effective Date of 2011 Amendment; Savings Provisions note under section 100 of this title.
Amendment by section 9(a) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to any civil action commenced on or after that date, see section 9(b) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 1071 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.
Amendment by section 20(j) of Pub. L. 112–29 effective upon the expiration of the 1-year period beginning on Sept. 16, 2011, and applicable to proceedings commenced on or after that effective date, see section 20(l) of Pub. L. 112–29, set out as a note under section 2 of this title.

Effective Date of 1999 Amendment
Amendment by section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4605(e)] of Pub. L. 106–113 applicable to any reexamination filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office on or after Nov. 2, 2002, see section 13202(d) of Pub. L. 107–273, set out as a note under section 134 of this title.
Amendment by section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4605(e)] of Pub. L. 106–113 effective Nov. 29, 1999, and applicable to any patent issuing from an original application filed in the United States on or after that date, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4608(a)] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 41 of this title.
Amendment by section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4732(a)(10)(A)] of Pub. L. 106–113 effective 4 months after Nov. 29, 1999, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4731] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.

Effective Date of 1984 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 98–622 effective three months after Nov. 8, 1984, see section 207 of Pub. L. 98–622, set out as a note under section 41 of this title.

Effective Date of 1982 Amendment
Amendment by Pub. L. 97–164 effective Oct. 1, 1982, see section 402 of Pub. L. 97–164, set out as a note under section 171 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 U.S.C. § 145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/35/145.