Skip to main content
Date

Tags:

Rule
802.50, Item 5
Staff
Diana Gillis
Response/Comments

For purposes of 802.50, a non-US patent is an asset located outside the US and does not generate sales in/into the US.

Question

From: Gillis, Diana L.
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 10:01 AM
To: [Redacted]; Walsh, Kathryn E.; Whitehead, Nora
Subject: RE: Foreign patent

For purposes of the foreign exemptions, that is correct (it is possible there could be US revenues for Item 5, e.g. if a US entity handles the licensing).

From: [Redacted]
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:50 AM
To: Walsh, Kathryn E.; Gillis, Diana L.; Whitehead, Nora
Subject: RE: Foreign patent

I should add that Interpretation 0802007 supports this view—as do a number of conversations I have had with Mike and others over the years. I ask again only because there is nothing recent confirming this position.

Thank you.

[Redacted]

From: [Redacted]
Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:47 AM
To: 'kwalsh (kwalsh@ftc.gov)'; 'Gillis, Diana L.'; Whitehead, Nora
Subject: Foreign patent

I have always understood that a non-US patent is an asset located outside the US for HSR purposes. I also believed that such a patent or trademark could not generate any sales in or into the US because it afforded no rights at all in the US and only a US patent or trademark could provide such rights.

Do you agree?

[Redacted]

About Informal Interpretations

Informal interpretations provide guidance from PNO staff on the applicability of the HSR rules to specific fact situations. They do not necessarily reflect the position of the Commission. You should not rely on them as a substitute for reading the Act and the Rules themselves. These materials do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice. 

Learn more about Informal Interpretations.