[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 30 (Thursday, February 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6826-6827]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-3546]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
[Docket No. WTO/D-11]
WTO Dispute Settlement Proceeding Regarding Patent Protection in
India for Pharmaceuticals and Agricultural Chemicals
AGENCY: Office of the United States Trade Representative.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 127(b)(1) of the Uruguay Round Agreements
Act (URAA) (19 U.S.C. 3537(b)(1)), the Office of the United States
Trade Representative (USTR) is providing notice that the United States
has requested the establishment of a dispute settlement panel under the
Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO), to examine
India's failure to make patent protection available for inventions as
specified in Article 27 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), or provide systems that conform
to obligations of the TRIPS Agreement regarding the acceptance of
applications and the grant of exclusive marketing rights. More
specifically, the United States has requested the establishment of a
panel to determine whether India's legal regime is inconsistent with
the obligations of the TRIPS Agreement, including but not necessarily
limited to Articles 27, 65 and 70. USTR also invites written comments
from the public concerning the issues raised in the dispute.
DATES: Although USTR will accept any comments received during the
course of the dispute settlement proceedings, comments should be
submitted on or before March 3, 1997, to be assured of timely
consideration by USTR in preparing its first written submission to the
panel.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted to Ileana Falticeni, Office of
Monitoring and Enforcement, Room 501, Attn: India Mailbox Dispute,
Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W.,
Washington, DC 20508.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas Robertson, Associate General Counsel, Office of the General
Counsel, Office of the U.S Trade Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20508 (202) 395-6800.
[[Page 6827]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 10, 1996, the United States
requested establishment of a WTO dispute settlement panel to examine
whether India's legal regime is inconsistent with the obligations of
the TRIPS Agreement. The WTO dispute Settlement Body (DSB) considered
the U.S. request at its meeting on November 20, 1996, at which time a
panel was established. Very recently, three panelists were chosen to
hear the dispute: Professor Thomas Cottier of the University of Berne
in Switzerland, Mr. Yanyong Phuangrach of the Ministry of Commerce in
Thailand, and Mr. Doug Chester of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade in Australia. The first meeting of panelists is scheduled to take
place on February 19, 1997. Under normal circumstances, the panel would
be expected to issue a report detailing its findings and
recommendations within six to nine months after it is established.
Major Issues Raised by the United States and Legal Basis of
Complaint
The TRIPS Agreement requires all WTO Members to grant patents for
the subject matter specified in Article 27 of the Agreement. Article
70.8 of the TRIPS Agreement provides that where a Member takes
advantage of the transitional provisions under the Agreement and does
not make product patent protection available for pharmaceutical and
agricultural chemical inventions as of the date of entry into force of
the WTO Agreement (i.e., January 1, 1995), that Member must implement
measures to permit Members' nationals to file patent applications drawn
to such inventions on or after that January 1, 1995. When the Member
fully implements the product patent provisions of TRIPS Agreement
Article 27, these applications must be examined according to the
criteria for patentability set forth in the Agreement, based on the
earliest effective filing date claimed for the application. Patents
granted on these applications must enjoy the term and rights mandated
by the TRIPS Agreement.
The TRIPS Agreement further requires Members subject to the
obligations of Article 70.8 to provide exclusive marketing rights to
those persons who have filed an application under the interim filing
procedures, provided that the product covered by the invention has been
granted marketing approval in the Member providing this transitional
protection and another Member, and a patent has been granted on the
invention in another Member.
The legal regime in India currently does not make patent protection
available for inventions as specified in Article 27 of the TRIPS
Agreement, or provide systems that conform to obligations of the TRIPS
Agreement regarding the acceptance of applications and the grant of
exclusive marketing rights. As a result, India's legal regime appears
to be inconsistent with the obligations of the TRIPS Agreement,
including but not necessarily limited to Articles 27, 65 and 70.
Public Comment: Requirements for Submissions
Interested persons are invited to submit written comments
concerning the issues raised in the dispute. Comments must be in
English and provided in fifteen copies. A person requesting that
information contained in a comment submitted by that person be treated
as confidential business information must certify that such information
is business confidential and would not customarily be released to the
public by the commenter. Confidential business information must be
clearly marked ``BUSINESS CONFIDENTIAL'' in a contrasting color ink at
the top of each page of each copy.
A person requesting that information or advice contained in a
comment submitted by that person, other than business confidential
information, be treated as confidential in accordance with section
135(g)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2155)--
(1) Must so designate that information or advice;
(2) Must clearly mark the material as ``SUBMITTED IN CONFIDENCE''
in a contrasting color ink at the top of each page of each copy; and
(3) Is encouraged to provide a non-confidential summary of the
information or advice.
Pursuant to section 127(e) of the URAA, USTR will maintain a file
on this dispute settlement proceeding, accessible to the public, in the
USTR Reading Room: Room 101, Office of the United States Trade
Representative, 600 17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20508. The public
file will include a listing of any comments received by USTR from the
public with respect to the proceeding; the U.S. submissions to the
panel in the proceeding; the submissions, or non-confidential summaries
of submissions, to the panel received from the other participants in
the dispute, as well as the report of the dispute settlement panel and,
if applicable, the report of the Appellate Body. An appointment to
review the public file (Docket WTO/D-11, ``U.S.-India: Mailbox''), may
be made by calling Brenda Webb, (202) 395-6186. The USTR Reading Room
is open to the public from 9:30 a.m. to 12 noon and 1 p.m. to 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday.
A. Jane Bradley,
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Monitoring and Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 97-3546 Filed 2-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190-01-M