10/18. The U.S. Court of Appeals (4thCir) denied rehearing en banc in Hatfill v. New York Times, a defamation case. It was 6-6 vote. See, order and dissent [16 pages in PDF].

The plaintiff is Steven Hatfill, a research scientist and germ warfare specialist. He was investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) in connection with the mailing of letters containing anthrax spores in the fall of 2001. He has not been prosecuted. No one has.

The original defendants were the New York Times (NYT), a daily newspaper and web site, and Nicholas Kristoff, a reporter employed by the NYT. Kristoff wrote on numerous occasions about the 2001 anthrax mailings, and the FBI's investigation. Hatfill asserts that this defamed him.

Hatfill filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (EDVa) against the NYT and Kristoff alleging defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, under Virginia state law. Hatfill dismissed the claims against Kristoff, on the basis that the court lacks personal jurisdiction over him.

The District Court dismissed the claims against the NYT for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Hatfill appealed.

The Court of Appeals reversed on July 28, 2005. Judge Dennis Shedd wrote the opinion [25 pages in PDF] for the majority. He quoted extensively from Kristoff's pieces in the NYT, and concluded that the complaint adequately alleges claims for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, based upon the courts construction of the Kristoff pieces.

Judge Niemeyer wrote a dissent. He argued that Kristoff criticized the FBI's handling of the investigation of Hatfill, and that Kristoff argued that the FBI should have been pursuing certain leads regarding Hatfill, but that Kristoff never accused Hatfill of sending the anthrax, or committing a crime. Niemeyer would have affirmed the District Court's dismissal.

This opinion is reported at 416 F.3d 320. See also, story titled "4th Circuit Reinstates Hatfill's Defamation Suit Against NYT" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,185, August 1, 2005.

The NYT petitioned for rehearing, or rehearing en banc. The Court of Appeals voted 6-6. Hence, the petition is denied.

Judge Wilkinson again wrote a lengthy dissent. He wrote that the NYT "was simply doing its job".

He focused on the nature and limitations of government agencies and bureaucracies, and the function that reporting plays in exposing and commenting on government action, and inaction. He wrote that "The consequences of this decision for the First Amendment run deep. If one purpose of public commentary is to assess the functioning of government, these columns were surely in that vein."

"Bureaucracies have been known to be both sluggish and inept, and it is not only the prerogative, but the duty, of news organizations to insist that those agencies get off the dime", said Wilkinson. "The perils of inaction and of overzealous action on the part of law enforcement are alike proper subjects for a free press. In fact, if there is any area that merits public scrutiny, it would seem to be the workings of our criminal justice system. Both in its investigative and judicial aspects, that system is capable of serious malfunction."

He asked rhetorically, "who else will do the job of calling bureaucratic judgments to account".

He concluded that "The panel’s decision in this case will restrict speech on a matter of vital public concern. The columns at issue urged government action on a question of grave national import and life-or-death consequence. It is unclear, to say the least, that Virginia law would ever find these columns to be defamatory, and the panel pushes state law in a direction that not only portends liability for valuable public commentary but aggravates, rather than alleviates, the constitutional tensions inherent in the defamation field."

Judges Michael and King joined in the dissent. Judges Niemeyer, Motz and Gregory also voted for rehearing, but did not join in the dissenting opinion. Judges Wilkins, Widener, Luttig, Traxler, Shedd, and Duncan voted to deny the petition for rehearing.

This case is Steven Hatfill v. The New York Times Company and Nicholas Kristoff, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, App. Ct. No. 04-2561, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, D.C. No. CA-04-807-A, Judge Claude Hilton presiding.

10/18. The U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) issued its opinion [PDF] in Sicom v. Agilent, a patent case involving when patent licensing or assigning agreements give the licensee/assignee standing to bring an action for infringement of the patent. The Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court's dismissal for lack of standing.

The patent in suit is U.S. Patent No. 5,333,147 titled "Automatic monitoring of digital communication channel conditions using eye patterns". Sicom is the plaintiff.

Sicom acquired its interest in this patent from the nation of Canada, which is not a party to this action. The Court of Appeals recited the facts regarding Sicom's agreement with Canada. "Canada granted Sicom a license of the ’147 patent under the Agreement. Sicom is a ``sole´´ licensee, which the Agreement defines as having ``the right to be the only licensee´´ of the patent. However, Canada has reserved for itself the right to continue operating under the patented technology, as well as a multitude of other rights, including: the right to veto Sicom's reassignment of its rights or proposed sublicenses; the right to levy additional royalties or other consideration; the right to grant contracts and sub-contracts to further develop the invention claimed in the patent; and the right to offer sublicenses under any improvements or corrections developed by Sicom. ... Canada also retained the right to sue for infringement other than commercial infringement and it retained legal title to the patent. ... Although Sicom does have an exclusive right to sue for commercial infringement under the Agreement and the Amendment ..."

Sicom filed a complaint in U.S. District Court (DDel) against Agilent Technologies and others alleging patent infringement.

The District Court's dismissed the complaint on the grounds that Sicom was not the owner of the patent, the licensor of the patent, or the holder of all substantial rights of the patent, and therefore did not qualify as an effective patentee, and lacked standing under the Patent Act to sue for infringement

Sicom appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed.

It wrote that "A nonexclusive license confers no constitutional standing on the licensee to bring suit or even to join a suit with the patentee because a nonexclusive licensee suffers no legal injury from infringement." However, "While a licensee normally does not have standing to sue without the joinder of the patentee (to prevent multiplicity of litigation), an exclusive license may be treated like an assignment for purposes of creating standing if it conveys to the licensee all substantial rights." (Parentheses in original.)

This Court of Appeals continued that "all substantial rights" are those rights sufficient for the licensee or assignee to be deemed the effective patentee under 35 U.S.C. § 281. It elaborated that each license and assignment is unique, and therefore, the Court must ascertain the intention of the parties and examine the substance of what the licensing agreement granted to determine if it conveys all of the substantial rights in the patent and is sufficient to grant standing to the licensee.

The Court of Appeals then applied these principles to the facts regarding the agreement between Sicom and Canada. "In this case, we must assess the Agreement at issue, weighing the rights in the patent transferred to Sicom against those retained by Canada, to determine whether Canada assigned all substantial rights in the patent, or fewer than all such rights."

It concluded that Canada did not assign all substantial rights. It found it significant that Canada reserved the right to sue for infringement other than commercial infringement. It added that "We find unpersuasive Sicom's response that it is not suing Appellees' customers, nor suing for non-commercial infringement, and that this court should not consider risks that are outside the scope of the facts in this case."

The Court added that "we find that Sicom, in other respects as well, has failed to show that it has all substantial rights under the patent. For instance, Sicom does not have the right to settle litigation without the prior written consent from Canada, nor does Sicom have the right to sublicense without Canada’s prior approval or to assign its rights."

It concluded that "In light of Canada’s right to permit infringement in certain cases, the requirement that Sicom consent to certain actions and be consulted in others, and the limits on Sicom’s right to assign its interests in the patent, we hold that the Agreement transfers fewer than all substantial rights in the patent from Canada to Sicom."

It added that a patent owner must be joined in any infringement suit brought by an exclusive licensee having fewer than all substantial rights, and Canada declined to join in the present action.

This case is Sicom Systems, Ltd. v. Agilent Technologies, Inc. and Tektronix, Inc. and Lecroy Corporation, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, App. Ct. No. 05-1066, an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, D.C. No. 03-1171-JJF, Judge Joseph Farnan presiding.

10/18. Numerous groups signed a letter to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld that expresses their opposition to the Department of Defense's (DOD) proposed project titled "Joint Advertising and Market Research Studies (JAMRS) Recruiting Database".

This database, as described in a notice published in the Federal Register, and in the DOD's website, would be an electronic database, national in scope, containing personally identifying information, that uses social security numbers as a unique identifier of individuals. It would merge data collected by the DOD, Selective Service System, state departments of motor vehicles, and private sector data aggregators. A purpose of the database would be to facilitate military recruitment. However, the DOD adds that data would be disclosed to federal, state and foreign governments for any of a wide range of vaguely defined purposes.

The letter was also sent to the Chairman and ranking Democrats on the House and Senate Appropriations and Armed Services Committees.

Many of the groups that signed the letter are anti-military and/or left wing organizations without expertise in technology related policy analysis. However, the signers also include groups that frequently engage in policy advocacy with respect to government uses of new information technologies that may affect individual privacy. These include the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), and Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).

On the other hand, the list of signers does not include some of the more conservative groups that have a record of advocating privacy rights. Nor is former Rep. Bob Barr a signer.

The letter asserts that "This database was established in violation of the Privacy Act." Although, the letter does not argue that the DOD cannot create such a database. Rather, it merely argues that since the DOD did not publish a notice in the Federal Register in a timely manner, it has not followed the requisite Privacy Act procedure.

The letter also addresses privacy policy. It states that "The DOD has reported that it plans to include in this database Social Security Numbers, race, and educational information; and entrust this information to a commercial direct marketing company."

It continues that "The direct marketing company chosen by the DOD, Benow, recently acquired by the credit reporting company Equifax, does not have a privacy policy, nor has it troubled itself to enlist in a privacy seal program regarding the handling of information collected for this purpose.

It also states that the "DOD proposes a wide range of ``Blanket Routine Uses.´´ A ``routine use´´ is a catchall loophole in the Privacy Act that allows an agency to disclose personal information to others without the individual's consent or knowledge. The list of fourteen DOD ``Blanket Routine Uses´´ include: disclosures to law-enforcement; state and local tax authorities; employment queries from other agencies; and disclosure of records to foreign authorities. Although individuals can opt-out recruitment solicitations, they cannot opt-out of this enormous database."

See also, the EPIC's web page titled "DOD Recruiting Database".

The DOD published a notice in the Federal Register (May 23, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 98, at Pages 29486 - 29487) that describes this database.

It states that this will be an electronic database, "maintained on electronic storage media".

It enumerates some of the fields, including "Full name, date of birth, gender, address, city, state, zip code, and where available Social Security Number (SSN), e-mail address, ethnicity, telephone number, ..."

The notice also lists unique identifiers that may be used to query the database. "Records may be retrieved by individual's name, Social Security Number, or by address".

The notice also states that the DOD will obtain information to include in its database from DOD sources. It adds that the DOD will obtain information from the Selective Service System and from "state Department of Motor Vehicle offices". It will also obtain information from "commercial information brokers/vendors".

The notice asserts that its main purpose is "to provide a single central facility within the Department of Defense to compile, process and distribute files of individuals who meet age and minimum school requirements for military service".

The notice also states that is may be used for other purposes. It states that "These records or information contained therein may specifically be disclosed outside the DoD as a routine use pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(b)(3) as follows". It then states that "The DoD `Blanket Routine Uses´ set forth at the beginning of OSD's compilation of systems of records notices apply to this system." (OSD is Office of the Secretary of Defense.)

The notice does not list or explain the "Blanket Routine Uses". However, the DOD has published a description of such "blanket routine uses" in a web page titled "Department of Defense Blanket Routine Uses".

These other uses of the database are numerous and broad. For example, there is a blanket exemption for providing data to "state and local taxing authorities". There is also an exemption for "counterintelligence activities". There is also an exemption for disclosure to foreign governments pursuant to "international agreements and arrangements".

The broadest exemption is titled "Law Enforcement Routine Use". It is actually broader than law enforcement. It applies to any "potential violation of law". It applies not only to disclosure to federal government entities, but also to state, local and foreign governments. It applies not only to criminal matters, but also to civil and regulatory matters. There is no restriction that the personal data that is disclosed must relate to individuals who potentially violated any law.

The wording of this exemption is as follows: "If a system of records maintained by a DoD Component to carry out its functions indicates a violation or potential violation of law, whether civil, criminal, or regulatory in nature, and whether arising by general statute or by regulation, rule, or order issued pursuant thereto, the relevant records in the system of records may be referred, as a routine use, to the agency concerned, whether federal, state, local, or foreign, charged with the responsibility of investigating or prosecuting such violation or charged with enforcing or implementing the statute, rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant thereto."

Tech Law Journal publishes a free access web site and subscription e-mail alert. The basic rate for a subscription to the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert is $250 per year. However, there are discounts for subscribers with multiple recipients. Free one month trial subscriptions are available. Also, free subscriptions are available for journalists, federal elected officials, and employees of the Congress, courts, and executive branch. The TLJ web site is free access. However, copies of the TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert are not published in the web site until one month after writing. See, subscription information page.

Contact: 202-364-8882.
P.O. Box 4851, Washington DC, 20008.

Privacy Policy
Notices & Disclaimers
Copyright 1998 - 2005 David Carney, dba Tech Law Journal. All rights reserved.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider several non-technology related items. See, Republican Whip Notice.

The Senate will meet at 9:30 AM. It will resume consideration of HR 3058, the transportation & treasury appropriations bill.

10:00 AM. The U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) will hold a meeting. The agenda includes "Vote on Emergency Amendment on Intellectual Property". See, notice. For more information, contact Michael Courlander at 202 502-4590. Location: Thurgood Marshall Federal Judiciary Building, One Columbus Circle, NE, Suite 2-500 (South Lobby).

TIME CHANGE. 10:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold a hearing titled "Reporters' Privilege Legislation: An Additional Investigation of Issues and Implications". The scheduled witnesses are Chuck Rosenberg (U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Texas), Judith Miller (The New York Times), David Westin (President of ABC News), Joseph diGenova (diGenova & Toensing), Anne Gordon (Managing Editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer), Dale Davenport (Editorial Page Editor of the The Patriot-News of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania), and Steven Clymer (Cornell Law School). The SJC frequently cancels of postpones hearings without notice. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) State and Local Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The speaker will be Monica Desai, Chief of the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Consumer & Governmental Affairs Bureau. RSVP to ann at fcba dot org. Location: FCC, 445 12th St., SW, Conference Room 4-B516.

12:30 - 2:00 PM. The Heritage Foundation will host a panel discussion titled "Must-Change TV?: Congress and Digital Television". The speakers will be Thomas Hazlett (George Mason University, Peter Pitsch (Intel), Charles Cooper (Cooper and Kirk), J.H. Snider (New America Foundation), and James Gattuso (Heritage). See, notice. Location: Lehrman Auditorium, Heritage, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

2:00 PM. The House Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection will hold a hearing titled "Protecting Property Rights After Kelo". See, notice. Press contact: Lisa Miller (Barton) at 202 225-5735 or Paul Flusche (Stearns) at 202 225-5744. Location: Room 2123, Rayburn Building.

2:00 PM. The Senate Judiciary Committee's (SJC) Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights  may hold a hearing titled "Video Competition in 2005 -- More Consolidation, or New Choices for Consumers?". The scheduled witnesses are Glenn Britt (Ch/CEO of Time Warner Cable), Kyle McSlarrow (P/CEO of the NCTA), Walter McCormick (P/CEO of the U.S. Telecom Association), Doron Gorshein (P/CEO of The America Channel), Peter Aquino (P/CEO of RCN Corporation), Scott Cleland (CEO of Precursor), and Mark Cooper (Consumer Federation of America). See, notice. The SJC frequently cancels of postpones hearings without notice. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

2:00 - 5:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Network Reliability and Interoperability Council (NRIC) will meet. The agenda includes "E911 implementation and evolution, network security, network reliability, and broadband". See, FCC notice [PDF] and notice in the Federal Register, September 28, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 187, at Page 56690. Location: FCC, Commission Meeting Room, 445 12th Street, SW.

2:30 - 6:00 PM. The Broadcasting Board of Governors will hold a meet to discuss international broadcasting. See, notice in the Federal Register, October 17, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 199, at Page 60278. Location: Cohen Building, Room 3321, 330 Independence Ave., SW.

RESCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 20. 2:30 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee will meet to mark up four bills: S __, a DTV bill, S 1753, the "Warning, Alert, and Response Network Act", S 967, the "Truth in Broadcasting Act of 2005", and S 1063, the "IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005". See, notice. Location: Room SDG-50, Dirksen Building.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Introduction to Export Controls". The speakers will include Thomas Scott (Weadon & Associates). The price to attend ranges from $80-$125. For more information, call 202-626-3488. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers' Committee will host an event titled "Happy Hour". For more information, contact Pam Slipakoff at pamslip at yahoo dot com. Location: Circle Bistro, One Washington Circle Hotel, One Washington Circle.

The House will meet at 10:00 AM for legislative business. It will consider several non-technology related items. See, Republican Whip Notice.

9:00 AM - 3:00 PM. The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Office of Justice Programs's (OJP) Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative Federal Advisory Committee will meet. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 16, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 157, at Page 48195. Location: Sheraton Crystal City Hotel, 1800 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA.

9:30 AM. The Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) may hold an executive business meeting. The SJC frequently cancels of postpones meetings without notice. Press contact: Blain Rethmeier (Specter) at 202 224-5225, David Carle (Leahy) at 202 224-4242 or Tracy Schmaler (Leahy) at 202 224-2154. See, notice. Location: Room 226, Dirksen Building.

10:00 AM - 12:00 PM. The House Science Committee will hold a hearing titled "Science, Technology, and Global Economic Competitiveness". The witnesses will be Norman Augustine, former Ch/CEO of Lockheed Martin, Roy Vagelos, former Ch/CEO of Merck & Co., and William Wulf, President of the National Academy of Engineering and Vice-Chair of the National Research Council. Press contact: Joe Pouliot at Joe dot Pouliot at mail dot house dot gov or 202 225-6371. Location: Room 2318, Rayburn Building.

10:00 AM. The Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee will hold a hearing titled "VA's IT Management -- Is it Ready for the 21st Century?". The witnesses will be Gordon Mansfield (Department of Veterans Affairs), Robert McFarland (VA Assistant Secretary for Information Technology and Chief Information Officer), Robert Lynch (Veterans Health Administration), Jack McCoy (Veterans Benefit Administration), Linda Koontz (Director of Information Management at the Government Accountability Office), and Paul Wohlleben (Information Technology Association of America). See, notice. Press contact: Jeff Schrade 202 224-9093. Location: Room 418, Russell Building.

12:00 NOON - 2:00 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a panel discussion titled "Federal and State Regulation of the U.S. Wireless Telecom Industry: Striking the Right Balance". The speakers will include Chuck Davidson (former Florida PUC Commissioner), Debra Berlyn (AARP), John Rogovin (Wilmer Cutler Hale & Dorr, former FCC General Counsel). The price to attend ranges from $15-$25. For more information, call 202 626-3463. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

DATE, TIME AND LOCATION CHANGE. 2:00 PM. The Senate Commerce Committee will meet to mark up four bills: S __, a DTV bill, S 1753, the "Warning, Alert, and Response Network Act", S 967, the "Truth in Broadcasting Act of 2005", and S 1063, the "IP-Enabled Voice Communications and Public Safety Act of 2005". See, notice. Location: Room 325, Russell Building.

2:00 - 4:30 PM. The Department of State's (DOS) Advisory Committee on International Communications and Information Policy (ACICIP) will meet. The agenda for this meeting includes "industry input for the first meeting of the newly-formed U.S.-India Information and Communications Technologies Working Group" and "a status report on preparations for the second phase of the World Summit on the Information Society, which will take place in Tunis, Tunisia from November 16-18, 2005. Contact Robert Watts at wattsrm at state dot gov by 5:00 PM to request permission to attend. See, notice in the Federal Register, September 30, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 189, at Page 57350. Location: Loy Henderson Auditorium, Truman Building, DOS, 2201 C Street, NW.

4:00 PM. The House Armed Services Committee's Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces  and Intelligence Committee's Subcommittee on Technical and Tactical Intelligence will hold a joint hearing on the Aerial Common Sensor (ACS) program. This program involves the development of a long range manned aircraft for surveillance and intelligence gathering operations, including communications intelligence (COMINT), electronic intelligence (ELINT), electro optical (EO), infrared (IR), synthetic aperture radar (SAR), and moving target indicator (MTI). The scheduled witnesses include Claude Bolton, Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology). Location: Room 2118, Rayburn Building.

6:00 - 8:00 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA) will host an event titled "Annual Fall Reception with the FCC Bureau Chiefs". The price to attend ranges from $20-$75. See, registration form [PDF]. Location: J.W. Marriott Hotel, 1331 Pennsylvania Ave, NW.

9:30 AM. The U.S. Court of Appeals (DCCir) will hear oral argument in Verizon v. FCC, No. 04-1331. Judges Ginsburg, Rogers and Griffith will preside. Location: Prettyman Courthouse, 333 Constitution Ave., NW.

Deadline to submit initial comments to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the joint petition filed by CTIA and the Rural Cellular Association (RCA) requesting relief of the FCC's requirement that wireless licensees that employ a handset based Enhanced 911 (E911) Phase II location technology achieve 95% penetration of location capable handsets among their subscribers by December 31, 2005. See, FCC notice [4 pages in PDF]. This proceeding is WT Docket No. 05-288. This is also the deadline to submit initial comments regarding Alltel's related petition. See, notice [PDF] in WT Docket No. 05-287. This is also the deadline to submit initial comments regarding Sprint Nextel's related petition. See, notice [PDF] in WT Docket No. 05-286.

12:00 NOON. Adam Mossoff (Michigan State University College of Law) will deliver a paper titled "Who Cares What Thomas Jefferson Thought About Patents: Reconsidering the Patent 'Privilege' in Historical Context". This event is a part of the George Washington University Law School's (GWULS) intellectual property workshop series. RSVP by Tuesday, October 18, to Rosalie Kouassi at rkouassi at law dot gwu dot edu. Location: GWULS, Faculty Conference Center, 5th Floor Burns, 716 20th St., NW.

12:00 NOON. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Engineering & Technical Practice Committee will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be a discussion of upcoming activities. RSVP to Deborah Wiggins at dwiggins at g2w2 dot com. Location: Goldberg Godles Wiener & Wright, 1229 19th Street, NW.

Day one of a two day conference hosted by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) titled "18th Annual Update 2005 Conference on Export Controls and Policy". See, conference web site. The price to attend ranges from $550-675. Location: Renaissance Hotel, Washington DC.

Day one of a three day conference hosted by the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) titled "4th  International Judges Conference on Intellectual Property Law". The only event on Monday, October 24 is a dinner and reception at the Library of Congress. See, conference brochure [PDF].

The Department of Justice's (DOJ) Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will host a one day event titled "Competition and Real Estate Workshop". On September 8, 2005, the DOJ filed a complaint in District Court against the National Association of Realtors (NAR). See, story titled "DOJ Sues National Association of Realtors for Obstructing Internet Based Brokers" in TLJ Daily E-Mail Alert No. 1,210, September 9, 2005. See, FTC notice and notice in the Federal Register, September 8, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 173, at Pages 53362 - 53364. Location: FTC, Satellite Building Conference Center, 601 New Jersey Ave., NW.

10:00 AM. The Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing on several pending nominations, including Matthew Slaughter and Katherine Baicker (to be members of the Council of Economic Advisors). See, notice. Location: Room 538, Dirksen Building.

11:30 - 2:00 PM. The Heritage Foundation will host a panel discussion titled "Hanging Up on Regulation: The Case for Telecom Reform". The speakers will be Sen. John Ensign (R-NV), James Gattuso (Heritage), and Michael Franc (Heritage). See, notice. Location: Lehrman Auditorium, Heritage, 214 Massachusetts Ave., NE.

12:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) Young Lawyers and Diversity Committees will host a brown bag lunch. The topic will be "Welcome to the Communications Bar". The speakers will include FCBA President Michele Farquhar (Hogan & Hartson), Russell Frisby (Kirkpatrick Lockhart Nicholson Graham). RSVP to Wendy Parish at wendy at fcba dot org. For more information, contact Natalie Roisman at 202 418-1655 or Jason Friedrich at 202 354-1340. Location: Akin Gump, 1333 New Hampshire Ave., NW, 10th Floor.

1:00 - 4:00 PM. The Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Office of Engineering and Technology (OET) Laboratory Division will hold a round table titled "Radiofrequency Exposure Compliance Procedures for evaluating 3-G Portable Devices". For more information, contact Patricia Wright at 301 362-3001 or patricia dot wright at fcc dot gov. See, notice [PDF]. Location: Conference Room, FCC Laboratory, 7435 Oakland Mills Road, Columbia, MD.

Day two of a two day conference hosted by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) titled "18th Annual Update 2005 Conference on Export Controls and Policy". See, conference web site. The price to attend ranges from $550-675. Location: Renaissance Hotel, Washington DC.

Day two of a three day conference hosted by the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) titled "4th  International Judges Conference on Intellectual Property Law". Jon Dudas, head of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), will deliver the luncheon address. See, conference brochure [PDF]. Location: Mandarin Oriental Hotel, between Maine and Maryland Avenues, and 12th and 14th Streets, SW.

Deadline to submit recommendations to the Department of Commerce's National Technical Information Service (NTIS) regarding candidates to be members of the NTIS Advisory Board. See, notice in the Federal Register, August 26, 2005, Vol. 70, No. 165, at Page 50303.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The DC Bar Association will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "How to Handle Opposition and Cancellation Actions Before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board". The speakers will include Judge Karen Kuhlke (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board), Judge Jeffrey Quinn (TTAB), Gary Krugman (Sughrue Mion), and Leigh Ann Lindquist, (Sughrue Mion). The price to attend ranges from $70-$105. For more information, call 202 626-3488. See, notice. Location: D.C. Bar Conference Center, 1250 H Street NW, B-1 Level.

6:00 - 8:15 PM. The Federal Communications Bar Association's (FCBA) will host a continuing legal education (CLE) seminar titled "Foreign Investment in FCC Licensees". The price to attend ranges from $50-$125. See, notice and registration form [MS Word]. For more information, contact Brian Weimer 202 371-7604. Location: Skadden Arps, Conference Room 11A, 700 14th Street, NW.

Day three of a three day conference hosted by the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) titled "4th  International Judges Conference on Intellectual Property Law".  Judge Paul Michel of the U.S. Court of Appeals (FedCir) will deliver the luncheon address. See, conference brochure [PDF]. Location: Mandarin Oriental Hotel, between Maine and Maryland Avenues, and 12th and 14th Streets, SW.