Co-Authored by Aditi Kulkarni and Emil J. Ali On April 26, 2022, The United States District Court for the Eastern District Court of Virginia dismissed a former patent examiner’s complaint and petition for review of the USPTO’s decision denying an application for registration to practice as a registered patent agent in a reasoned decision. The […]
The USPTO has suspended a PTO-employed attorney for thirty (30) days for practicing trademark law before the Office for private clients, in violation of federal conflicts of interest laws. See In re Tara K. Laux, Proc. No. D2016-39 (USPTO Dir. Mar. 9, 2017). According to a settlement agreement reached with the OED Director, attorney Tara
PTO Suspends PTAB Atty Who Filed Multiple TM Apps For Cannabis Client Read More »
The three-year ethics saga between Matthew Swyers, owner of The Trademark Company, and the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED), ended with a whisper, with Mr. Swyers agreeing to resign from practicing before the USPTO. By entering into what is called an “exclusion on consent” agreement, Mr. Swyers voluntarily gives up the ability to provide U.S. trademark-related legal services for a minimum of five (5) years.
Epic Ethics Legal Battle By Trademark Company Owner Ends Quietly With Resignation Read More »
I am pleased to announce the addition of a new family member to this Blog: A USPTO disciplinary decision search engine and reader-friendly digest of USPTO disciplinary decisions. This feature can be found by clicking here or on the “PTO Discipline” tab beneath the IPethics & INsights banner. Why A Search Engine Why go through
New USPTO Discipline Search Engine Added To IPethics & INsights Read More »
To all of you who have been dying to know what happened in the world of ethics and discipline at the USPTO in the past year, I am pleased to say your wait is finally over. I have written, “2016 USPTO Disciplinary Decisions — The Year in Review.” Why was The 2016 Year in Review
2016 USPTO Disciplinary Decisions – The Year In Review Read More »
A recent disciplinary decision published by the USPTO Director illustrates a serious flaw in the Office’s rules governing reciprocal discipline. In re Sanjeev Kumar Dhand, D2016-17 (USPTO Dir. Nov. 16, 2016). California Discipline The factual background of the Dhand case is eerily similar to our post from yesterday (link here). This matter involves California-based patent
USPTO Reciprocal Discipline Case Illustrates Flaw In Rules Read More »
On August 5, 2016, the USPTO Director issued a Final Order reversing an administrative law judge’s initial decision, which had suspended a practitioner for 18 months. The Final Order held the OED Director violated USPTO precedent and mandatory rules regarding reciprocal discipline—37 C.F.R. § 11.24. The Final Order is significant because it not only confirms the
USPTO Director Reverses ALJ In Disciplinary Case, Rules In Favor Of Attorney Read More »
Many members of the public, and some attorneys themselves, believe that if they do not lie, they do not steal, and they do not cheat, then their conduct necessarily complies with the Rules of Professional Conduct. This is a false assumption. Others believe that an attorney’s “transgressions” in her personal life will not affect her
Bar Counsel Imposes Discipline For “Personal” Misconduct & Legal But Unethical Behavior Read More »
