An ethics blog for IP attorneys
Lawyers love to talk about their client success stories and latest wins, particularly on websites, blogs, LinkedIn and other social media. This form of lawyer self-promotion is particularly pronounced in litigation matters, where the victorious lawyers and their firms routinely, and proudly, announce to the world what wonderful result they achieved for their client. Many […]
Read More
The USPTO has once again disclosed confidential information of applicants—this time for patent applicants. Previously, the USPTO has disclosed confidential information of trademark applicants, including a breach of home addresses. However, many practitioners have wondered—what are their obligations with respect to the USPTO’s actions. Duty to Communicate with Clients When the USPTO breaches its duty […]
Read More
The USPTO’s Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) handles investigations and disciplinary proceedings against attorneys and other practitioners who engage in misconduct before the USPTO. Navigating these complex proceedings without legal representation can be a daunting and perilous task. We have covered previously various best practices regarding what to do if you find yourself with […]
Read MoreThe “U.S. Counsel Rule” Turns Five: Best Practices For Trademark Attorneys To Avoid USPTO Discipline
This week marks five years since the USPTO implemented its Requirement of U.S. Licensed Attorney for Trademark Applicants and Registrants. Also known as the “U.S. Counsel Rule”, the USPTO on August 2, 2019 amended its trademark rules of practice to require any non-U.S. domiciled trademark applicant, registrant, or party to a USPTO trademark proceeding to […]
Read More
37 CFR 11.801 is a regulation that imposes a duty on practitioners to cooperate with the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED). The regulation is divided into two key provisions that apply to applicants for registration, and those under disciplinary/reinstatement investigation: False Statements: The regulation first proscribes making false statements of material fact. This is […]
Read More
The world of intellectual property law is buzzing with questions and commentary regarding the practicality and ethics of using artificial intelligence to aid the practice of law before the USPTO. As I addressed in a prior blog post, some of the concerns are much ado about nothing. However, one question previously left unanswered was the […]
Read More
The USPTO’s reputation for being focused on signatures is growing almost as fast as pendency. However, with recent court decisions, much is left to the eye of the beholder–leaving practitioners and their clients uncertain regarding the state of the law. Why Signatures Matter to the USPTO 37 CFR 11.18 mandates a two-part certification process whenever […]
Read More
In the past year, I have seen an increase in questions related to artificial intelligence. Specifically, patent and trademark lawyers have asked whether it is permissible for those lawyers engaged in practice before the USPTO to use Generative AI. While I have and continue to present on this topic multiple times, including (here), (here), and […]
Read More
First Contact The envelope comes by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested and stamped as “Personal and Confidential.” Inside is a letter from the USPTO captioned “REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 11.22(f).” The letter goes on to read that the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) received information regarding you, and that […]
Read More
On October 18, 2023, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in GREAT CONCEPTS, LLC, v. CHUTTER, INC., reversing the decision of the USPTO’s Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. The Court analyzed very crucial point in the progeny of In re Bose— whether alleged fraud on the USPTO that could invalidate a trademark application also applies […]
Read More