Drucksache 19/25829.pdf

Okay, I need to create a concise summary in German for the given document. Let me start by reading through the content carefully.

The document is from the German Bundestag, specifically the 19th parliamentary term. It's about a recommendation by the Committee for Justice and Consumer Protection (6th Committee) regarding two constitutional court cases, 2 BvR 2216/20 and 2 BvR 2217/20. The main issue is that multiple claimants are challenging the law on the European Patent Convention from February 19, 2013. The Bundestag had previously passed a consent law in 2017, but it wasn't enacted because it didn't get the required two-thirds majority in both the Bundestag and Bundesrat. The successful claimant in the 2 BvR 739/17 case is now filing a new constitutional complaint against the second, unchanged consent law.

There are also requests for interim orders to prevent the law's implementation and the ratification of the treaty. The Bundestag provided a statement on January 8, 2021, as per the constitutional court's request under §32 Abs. 2 of the Federal Constitutional Court Act. The committee recommends joining the proceedings, giving a statement, and requesting the appointment of a legal representative. The alternatives section says there are none, and the costs are for process representation.

The summary needs to be detailed but concise. I should start with the main problem, then the solution (the committee's recommendation), and alternatives and costs. Make sure to mention the dates, the committees involved, the legal references, and the outcome. Avoid any markdown and keep it in German. Check for any specific terms or legal phrases that need to be accurate. Also, note that the committee's recommendation is against the AfD's vote. Ensure that the key points are all included without extra information. Let me structure this step by step.

Der Ausschuss für Recht und Verbraucherschutz (6. Ausschuss) des Deutschen Bundestags (19. Wahlperiode) empfiehlt, den Streitverfahren vor dem Bundesverfassungsgericht 2 BvR 2216/20 und 2 BvR 2217/20 beizutreten. Die Beschwerdeführenden klagen das Gesetz zum Übereinkommen vom 19. Februar 2013 über ein Einheitliches Patentgericht an, das im Jahr 2017 zwar von beiden Kammergebnissen (Bundestag und Bundesrat) beschlossen, aber nicht ausgefertigt wurde. Der Bundesverfassungsgericht hat das Gesetz für nichtig erklärt (Beschluss 2 BvR 739/17 vom 13. Februar 2020). Der Ausschuss begründet seine Empfehlung mit der Stärkung der prozessualen Stellung des Bundestags, nachdem dieser bereits am 8. Januar 2021 eine Stellungnahme abgegeben hatte. Die Empfehlung wird mit den Stimmen der CDU/CSU, SPD, FDP, DIE LINKE. und BÜNDNIS 90/DIE GRÜNEN gegen die AfD abgegeben. Alternativen werden nicht genannt, die Kosten betragen die Prozessvertretungskosten.