Page images
PDF
EPUB

Prepared Statement of the Armed Services Patent Advisory

Board (ASPAB), Department of Defense, before the Government

Information and Individual Rights Subcommittee of the House
Committee on Government Operations.

V

Mr. Chairman:

Thank you for the opportunity to address you and your Subcommittee.

I am Richard S. Sciascia, Field Patent Director, Office

of Naval Research and Chairman of the Armed Services Patent Advisory Board or ASPAB, as it is more commonly known.

With me today are Lieutenant Colonel Howard M. Hougen,

Intellectual Property Division, Office of The Judge Advocate
General, Department of the Army, my predecessor as Chairman
of the ASPAB, Donald J. Singer, Acting Chief, Patents
Division, Office of The Judge Advocate General, Department
of the Air Force and Mr. Frank G. Nieman, Principal Patent
Staff Attorney, Office of Naval Research, Department of
the Navy.

Under the provisions of Chapter 17 of Title 35, United
States Code, the Secretary of Defense and the heads of

other designated agencies have authority to cause a secrecy order to be imposed on patent applications pending in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). Within the Department of Defense, this authority has been delegated by directive to the Secretaries of each of the military departments. They in turn have redelegated their authority to their respective sections of the ASPAB. The ASPAB is composed of an Army Section, a Navy Section, and an Air Force Section. Each Section comprises four members and

a similar number of alternates. The ASPAB elects its Chairman. The ASPAB is under the management control of the Department of the Army, which furnishes the Secretary of the ASPAB. The three men with me represent the three sections of the Board.

When the ASPAB was created, the National Security Agency was not in existence. It has therefore not been represented in ASPAB membership. The Office of The Judge Advocate

General of the Army has acted on behalf of the Agency.

The ASPAR represents the Secretary of Defense in the secrecy order process. Recommendations to impose, modify, renew,

or rescind secrecy orders are made by members of the ASPAB to the Secretary of the ASPAB. The ASPAB Secretary then

transmits the official recommendation of the Board to the

Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks.

When a secrecy order is imposed, the PTO continues to examine the patent application in a routine manner, using special patent examiners who have security clearances. The patent applicant and his representatives are cautioned against disclosure of the contents of the application to When the normal examination results in a

new persons.

determination that the application is in "condition for allowance" to be issued as a patent, further action on

the patent application is held in abeyance until the secrecy order is rescinded.

Secrecy orders are imposed on three basic categories of patent applications which have been filed in the PTO.

The first category includes those applications in which the Government has a property interest. This would include inventions made by government employees either as part of their normal duties or on their own behalf, on which patent applications have been filed by the Government. It also includes inventions made by government contractors during performance of their contractual duties. When the Government has a property interest in an application, the

security classification of the patent application document determines whether it should be placed under secrecy order. If a patent application is properly classified under the provisions of Executive Order 12065, then disclosure of

the contents of the application would clearly be detrimental to national security. Such applications are prepared with appropriate classification markings. It follows that such patent applications must be placed under secrecy order.

The military departments initiate the imposition of secrecy orders on patent applications in which the Government has a property interest, without any preliminary action by the PTO. At some time during early stages of patent prosecution, the military department prosecuting the application or monitoring the contract submits a request to the Secretary of the ASPAB, who transmits to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks the ASPAB recommendation to impose a secrecy order on the application.

A second major category includes patent applications filed by foreign applicants, which have been placed under secrecy order in the applicants' home countries. Under bilateral agreements with a number of allied countries or the multilateral agreement with members of the North Atlantic

orders.

Treaty Organization, there is a procedure for mutual filing of patent applications which have been placed under secrecy In each of these countries, there is a secrecy order system similar to that existing in the United States. When the country of origin has determined that a patent application can be filed in the United States provided the application is maintained under secrecy, the patent application is forwarded through diplomatic channels to the applicant's representatives in the United States for preparation of a United States patent application. The ASPAB arranges for such representatives to receive industrial security clearances for handling classified information. When such an application has been filed in the United States PTO, it will normally bear security markings identifying the security status imposed by the government of origin. These foreign applications may be government-owned or, as is more likely the case, privately Upon the request of the government of origin or the individual applicant, the Secretary of the ASPAB transmits to the Commissioner a recommendation to impose a secrecy order in compliance with the international

owned.

agreements.

This category makes up approximately one-fourth

of the ASPAB-sponsored secrecy orders.

« PreviousContinue »