To require the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office to conduct a study on effective ways to provide confirming genetic diagnostic test activity where gene patents and exclusive licensing exist, and for other purposes.
Latest action. Referred to the subcommitteeA smaller panel inside a standing committee with jurisdiction over a slice of its subject matter. Most hearings and the first markup usually happen here.Read the full definition (opens a new tab) on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet.
Directs the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to: (1) study ways to provide independent, confirming genetic diagnostic test activity where gene patents and exclusive licensing for primary genetic diagnostic tests exist; and (2) report the findings to Congress within nine months along with recommendations for establishing the availability of such independent confirming genetic diagnostic test activity.
Defines “confirming genetic diagnostic test activity” as the performance of a genetic diagnostic test, by a genetic diagnostic test provider, on an individual solely for the purpose of providing the individual with an independent confirmation of results obtained from another test provider’s prior performance of the test on the individual.
Written by analysts at the Congressional Research Service and published on Congress.gov, not by Civibrief. Summarized at the "Introduced in House" stage on June 22, 2011. It describes the bill, it is not the legal text.
Where is it in the process, and what happens next?
4 steps remain before this bill could become law.
The record's latest action, on August 25, 2011: Referred to the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Competition and the Internet.
- Clearing the committees it was referred to, and being scheduled for a floor vote
- Passage by the House
- Passage by the Senate
- The President's signature. If the President vetoes it, two-thirds of both chambers must vote to override.
How likely is it to become law?
Civibrief does not forecast outcomes and this page has no opinion about this one. What the record supports is a base rate, which is a fact about the whole pile, not a prediction about this measure.
In the 112th Congress (2011-12), 283 of the 10,618 bills and joint resolutions introduced became law, about 2.7 percent. That count covers every measure at every stage, including the many that never left committee.
This one is not there yet: 4 steps are still outstanding, listed above.
Has anyone actually voted on it?
No. No roll call in this Congress cites this measure. That is the ordinary outcome: most measures never reach a recorded floor vote, and a committee ends most of them simply by not acting.
A vote is not the only thing that happens to a measure. Hearings, markups, and referrals are all recorded actions, and none of them is a vote of the full chamber.
Who is behind it?
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) introduced it on June 22, 2011. No cosponsors are recorded.
Cosponsoring is a formal signature on the text. It is not a commitment to vote for the measure, it does not bind anyone's party, and a long list of cosponsors is a measure of attention rather than of prospects.
How long has it been in play?
It was introduced on June 22, 2011, 5606 days ago. The most recent recorded action was 5542 days ago, on August 25, 2011.
Measures do not carry over. Anything the 112th Congress has not finished by January 3, 2013 dies when the term ends, and has to be introduced again from the start in the next Congress.
Every answer above is assembled from this measure's own record on Congress.gov and from published counts of what Congress has passed before. Civibrief does not predict outcomes and takes no position on any measure.
Vote history
- HouseIn committee, no floor vote yet
- SenateAwaits House passage
- PresidentAwaits both chambers