Patent and Trademark Office – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents
Results 601 - 650 of 1,013
Cooperative Patent Classification External User Day
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is hosting a Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) External User Day event at its Alexandria Campus. CPC is a partnership between the USPTO and the European Patent Office (EPO) in which the Offices have agreed to develop a joint patent classification system that will incorporate the best classification practices of the two Offices. This CPC event is the next step, in a series of steps, to be undertaken by the USPTO in educating and informing external stakeholders about the current development and future implementation plans of the CPC.
Changes in Requirements for Specimens and for Affidavits or Declarations of Continued Use or Excusable Nonuse in Trademark Cases
In order to help assess and ensure the accuracy of the trademark register, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') is revising the Trademark Rules of Practice and the Rules of Practice for Filings Pursuant to the Madrid Protocol to allow the USPTO to: Upon request, require any additional specimens, information, exhibits, and affidavits or declarations deemed reasonably necessary to examine a post registration affidavit or declaration of continued use or excusable nonuse in trademark cases, and for a two-year period, conduct a pilot program for the USPTO to assess the accuracy and integrity of the register; and upon request, require more than one specimen in connection with a use-based trademark application, an allegation of use, or an amendment to a registered mark. These revisions aim to ensure the ability to rely on the trademark register as an accurate reflection of marks that are actually in use in the United States for the goods/services identified in the registration, and thereby reduce costs and burdens on the public.
Trademark Petitions
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Transitional Program for Covered Business Method Patents-Definition of Technological Invention
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes a new rule to implement the provision of the Leahy- Smith America Invents Act that requires the Office to issue regulations for determining whether a patent is for a technological invention in a transitional post-grant review proceeding for covered business method patents. The provision of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act will take effect on September 16, 2012, one year after the date of enactment. The provision and any regulations issued under the provision will be repealed on September 16, 2020, with respect to any new petitions under the transitional program.
Changes To Implement Derivation Proceedings
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes new rules to implement the provisions of the Leahy- Smith America Invents Act that create a new derivation proceeding to be conducted before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). These provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act will take effect on March 16, 2013, eighteen months after the date of enactment, and apply to applications for patent, and any patent issuing thereon, that are subject to first-inventor-to-file provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.
Changes to Implement Inter Partes Review Proceedings
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes new rules to implement the provisions of the Leahy- Smith America Invents Act that create a new inter partes review proceeding to be conducted before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). These provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act will take effect on September 16, 2012, one year after the date of enactment, and apply to any patent issued before, on, or after the effective date.
Changes To Implement Transitional Program for Covered Business Method Patents
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes new rules to implement the provisions of the Leahy- Smith America Invents Act that create a new transitional post-grant review proceeding for covered business method patents to be conducted before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). These provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act will take effect on September 16, 2012, one year after the date of enactment. These provisions and any regulations issued under these provisions will be repealed on September 16, 2020, with respect to any new petitions under the transitional program.
Changes To Implement Post-Grant Review Proceedings
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes new rules to implement the provisions of the Leahy- Smith America Invents Act that create a new post-grant review proceeding to be conducted before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). These provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act will take effect on September 16, 2012, one year after the date of enactment, and generally apply to patents issuing from applications subject to first-inventor-to-file provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.
Rules of Practice for Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Judicial Review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board Decisions
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes new rules of practice to implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act that provide for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). The proposed rules would provide a consolidated set of rules relating to Board trial practice for inter partes review, post-grant review, the transitional program for covered business method patents, and derivation proceedings. The proposed rules would also provide a consolidated set of rules to implement the provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act related to seeking judicial review of Board decisions.
Practice Guide for Proposed Trial Rules
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act establishes several new trial proceedings to be conducted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) including inter partes review, post-grant review, the transitional program for covered business method patents, and derivation proceedings. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act also requires the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) to promulgate rules specific to each proceeding. In separate rulemakings elsewhere in this issue and in the February 10, 2012, issue of the Federal Register, the Office proposes rules relating to Board trial practice for the new proceedings. The Office publishes in this document a practice guide for the proposed trial rules to advise the public on the general framework of the proposed regulations, including the structure and times for taking action in each of the new proceedings.
Request for Comments and Notice of Public Hearings on Genetic Diagnostic Testing
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') is interested in gathering information on the genetic diagnostic testing for purposes of preparing a report on the subject as required by the America Invents Act (AIA or Act). To assist in gathering this information, the USPTO invites the public to provide comments and to attend public hearings addressing genetic diagnostic testing. Public Hearings: The USPTO will hold two public hearings in support of the genetic testing study. The first public hearing will be held on Thursday, February 16, 2012, beginning at 9 a.m., Eastern Standard Time (EST), and ending at 4 p.m., EST, in Alexandria, Virginia. The second public hearing will be held on Friday, March 9, 2012, beginning at 9 a.m., Pacific Standard Time (PST), and ending at 4 p.m., PST, in San Diego, California. Those wishing to present oral testimony at either hearing must request an opportunity to do so in writing no later than February 8, 2012. Requests to testify should indicate the following: (1) The name of the person wishing to testify; (2) the person's contact information (telephone number and email address); (3) the organization(s) the person represents, if any; (4) an indication of the amount of time needed for the testimony; and (5) a preliminary written copy of the testimony. The USPTO asks for a preliminary written copy of the testimony in order to better prepare for pre-scheduled witness testimony. Requests to testify must be submitted by email to Saurabh Vishnubhakat at saurabh.vishnubhakat@uspto.gov. Based upon the requests received, an agenda for witness testimony will be sent to testifying requesters and posted on the USPTO Internet Web site (address: www.uspto.gov/americainventsact). Speakers providing testimony at the hearings should submit a written copy of their testimony for inclusion in the record of the proceedings no later than March 26, 2012. The public hearings will be available via Web cast. Information about the Web cast will be posted on the USPTO's Internet Web site (address: https://www.uspto.gov/americainventsact) before the public hearing. Transcripts of the hearings will be available on the USPTO Internet Web site (address: www.uspto.gov/americainventsact) shortly after the hearings. Written Comments: Written comments should be sent by email to genetest@uspto.gov. Comments may also be submitted by postal mail addressed to Saurabh Vishnubhakat, Attorney Advisor, Office of Chief Economist, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Mail Stop External Affairs, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA 22313-1450. Although comments may be submitted by postal mail, the USPTO prefers to receive comments via email. The deadline for receipt of written comments is March 26, 2012. Written comments should be identified in the subject line of the email or postal mailing as ``Genetic Testing Study.'' Because written comments and testimony will be made available for public inspection, information that a respondent does not desire to be made public, such as a phone number, should not be included in the testimony or written comments.
Changes To Implement the Supplemental Examination Provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act and To Revise Reexamination Fees
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is proposing to amend the rules of practice in patent cases to implement the supplemental examination provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. The supplemental examination provisions permit a patent owner to request supplemental examination of a patent by the Office to consider, reconsider, or correct information believed to be relevant to the patent. These provisions could assist the patent owner in addressing certain challenges to the enforceability of the patent during litigation. The Office is also proposing to adjust the fee for filing a request for ex parte reexamination and to set a fee for petitions filed in ex parte and inter partes reexamination proceedings to more accurately reflect the cost of these processes.
Establishment of a One-Year Retention Period for Trademark-Related Papers That Have Been Scanned Into the Trademark Initial Capture Registration System
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is establishing a one-year retention period that began on September 26, 2011, for papers scanned into the Trademark Initial Capture Registration System (TICRS) prior to September 26, 2011, or began or begins on a paper's submission date, for papers scanned into TICRS on or after September 26, 2011. After the expiration of the one-year retention period, the USPTO will dispose of the paper documents unless, within sufficient time prior to disposal, the relevant trademark applicant or owner files a request to correct the electronic record in TICRS, and the request remains outstanding at the time disposal would otherwise have occurred. The one-year retention period for papers scanned into TICRS will reduce the costs currently associated with indefinitely warehousing paper documents, while permitting sufficient time for the review and rarely needed correction of the scanning of such paper documents. The USPTO received no comments to the notice published September 23, 2011 on this proposal.
Changes To Implement the Prioritized Examination for Requests for Continued Examination
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act includes provisions for prioritized examination of patent applications. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) implemented the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act prioritized examination provision following the prioritized examination track (Track I) of the proposed 3-Track examination process in a previous final rule. The final rule was made applicable to newly filed patent applications. In order to provide patent applicants with the flexibility to accelerate processing of their applications in which a request for continued examination has been filed, the Office is now permitting applicants to request prioritized examination for applications after the filing of a request for continued examination.
Sunset of the Patent Application Backlog Reduction Stimulus Plan and a Limited Extension of the Green Technology Pilot Program
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) has provided two procedures under which an applicant may have an application accorded special status for examination. The Patent Application Backlog Reduction Stimulus Plan is available if the applicant expressly abandons another copending unexamined application. The Green Technology Pilot Program is available to patent applications pertaining to environmental quality, energy conservation, development of renewable energy resources, and greenhouse gas emission reduction. In view of the trend in filings under the Patent Application Backlog Reduction Stimulus Plan, this plan has fulfilled its purpose and will not be extended. In view of the success of the Green Technology Pilot Program, this plan will be extended until 500 additional applications have been accorded special status under this program or until March 30, 2012, whichever occurs earlier. Following the expiration of this extension, the program will be eliminated, and applicants may instead use the newly enacted Prioritized Examination (Track I) program. The Track I program not only provides advancement of examination, but sets a target of reaching final disposition within 12 months from the time advancement is initiated. Furthermore, the advancement in the Track I program is available to all technologies and is not restricted to certain categories of invention as in the Pilot Program.
Revision of Patent Term Adjustment Provisions Relating to Information Disclosure Statements
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is revising the patent term adjustment provisions of the rules of practice in patent cases. The patent term adjustment provisions of the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 (AIPA) provide for a reduction of any patent term adjustment if the applicant failed to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution of the application. The Office is revising the rules of practice pertaining to the reduction of patent term adjustment for applicant delays to exclude information disclosure statements resulting from the citation of information in a counterpart application that are promptly filed with the Office. The rule change allows the diligent applicant to avoid patent term adjustment reduction for an IDS submission that results from a communication from the Office. Presently, the rule only provides relief if the IDS was cited as a result of a communication from a foreign patent office. Under this final rule, there will be no reduction of patent term adjustment in the following situations: when applicant promptly submits a reference in an information disclosure statement after the mailing of a notice of allowance if the reference was cited by the Office in another application, or when applicant promptly submits a copy of an Office communication (e.g., an Office action) in an information disclosure statement after the mailing of a notice of allowance if the Office communication was issued by the Office in another application or by a foreign patent office in a counterpart foreign application. The above changes are intended to ensure compliance with AIPA in light of the evolving case law.
Fee for Filing a Patent Application Other Than by the Electronic Filing System
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act provides an additional fee of $400 for applications not filed electronically. This final rule revises the rules of practice to include the fee for applications not filed electronically.
Trademark Technical and Conforming Amendments
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') is adopting as a final rule, with minor changes, an interim final rule amending the Rules of Practice in Trademark Cases and the Rules of Practice in Filings Pursuant to the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Marks (``Madrid Rules'') to implement the Trademark Technical and Conforming Amendment Act of 2010. The interim final rule was published in the Federal Register on June 24, 2010. This final rule makes minor changes to the interim final rule to incorporate additional statutory language being implemented.
Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure, Eighth Edition
To provide information on trademark examination policy and procedure, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') issued the eighth edition of the Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (``TMEP''), and made available an archived copy of the seventh edition, on October 15, 2011.
Discontinuing the Mass Mailing of Paper Fee Schedules to Registered Attorneys, Agents, and Deposit Account Holders
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is discontinuing the mass mailing of revised paper fee schedules to registered attorneys, agents, and deposit account holders when fees are adjusted due to enactment of legislation or fluctuations in the Consumer Price Index. Since a substantial majority of filings and fee payments are submitted on-line, and the most up-to-date fee schedule is always available and maintained on-line, the USPTO has discontinued the mass mailing of the paper fee schedules. The current fee schedule is essentially built into the on-line systems (e.g., EFS-Web, TEAS, accessible through the USPTO home page, etc.), which display the current fee amounts required at the time of submitting the payment.
National Medal of Technology and Innovation Nomination Evaluation Committee Meeting
The National Medal of Technology and Innovation (NMTI) Nomination Evaluation Committee will meet in closed session on Friday, November 18, 2011. The primary purpose of the meeting is to discuss the relative merits of persons, teams and companies nominated for the 2011 NMTI Medal.
Grant of Interim Extension of the Term of U.S. Patent No. 5,407,914; SURFAXIN® (Lucinactant)
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has issued an Order Granting Interim Extension for a third one-year interim extension of the term of U.S. Patent No. 5,407,914.
Request for Comments on Intellectual Property Enforcement in China
As China has become a major trading partner for the United States, U.S. rights holders are increasingly seeking to protect and enforce their intellectual property (IP) in that country. China's patent and trademark offices are now among the largest in the world in terms of filings, and its IP enforcement system is being increasingly utilized by U.S. rights holders. Ensuring that the Chinese IP system works in a fair and timely manner for U.S. innovators is a top priority for the U.S. Government. To that end, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), in collaboration with other U.S. Government agencies, is leading an effort to identify and assess the challenges U.S. inventors are facing with China's judicial and administrative patent enforcement systems. The USPTO would like to address the concerns of rights holders by working with them to identify problemssuch as difficulties in gathering evidence, meeting evidentiary requirements, protecting proprietary information, obtaining adequate damages, and enforcing preliminary injunctionsto then find ways to address these issues with the Chinese Government. As part of this effort, the USPTO, in coordination with the White House Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC), has conducted a series of roundtables to obtain the views of diverse members of the patent community who have first-hand experience enforcing their patents in China. Roundtables were held on July 19, 2011, in Washington, DC; on July 26, 2011, in Beijing, China; on July 29, 2011, in Shanghai, China; and on August 1, 2011, in Guangzhou, China. Topics for discussion included: (1) Acquisition and enforcement of utility model and design patents; (2) evidence collection and preservation in Chinese courts; (3) obtaining damages and injunctions; (4) enforceability of court orders; and (5) administrative patent enforcement. To ensure that the USPTO receives a wide array of views, the USPTO would like to invite any member of the public to submit written comments on China's patent enforcement system, including, but not limited to, the five specific issues listed above. Examples of first- hand experience using China's patent enforcement system, and recommendations on ways to improve the system, are encouraged. Based on these comments, the USPTO intends to produce a report that details the patent enforcement landscape in China and identifies any challenges faced by U.S. innovators, together with recommendations for improving the system.
Performance Review Board (PRB)
In conformance with the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announces the appointment of persons to serve as members of its Performance Review Board.
Public User ID Badging
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the revision of a continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Notice of Availability of Patent Fee Changes Under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is publishing this notice to advise the public of the availability, on the USPTO's Web site, of the patent fee amounts that will be in effect ten days after the date of enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (i.e., September 26, 2011) by operation of the fifteen percent surcharge provided for in section 11(i) and the prioritized examination fee provided for in Section 11(h). The USPTO's Web site also specifies the additional fee for applications not filed by electronic means in effect sixty days after the date of enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (i.e., November 15, 2011) by operation of section 10(h). The USPTO's Web site for fee information is https:// www.uspto.gov/about/offices/cfo/finance/fees.jsp.
Changes To Implement the Prioritized Examination Track (Track I) of the Enhanced Examination Timing Control Procedures Under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act
On April 4, 2011, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) published a final rule that revised the rules of practice in patent cases to implement a procedure under which applicants may request prioritized examination at the time of filing of an application upon payment of appropriate fees and compliance with certain requirements (Track I final rule). The prioritized examination procedure is the first track (Track I) of a 3-Track examination process designed to provide applicants with greater control over when their utility and plant applications are examined and to promote greater efficiency in the patent examination process. The Office subsequently published a final rule on April 29, 2011, indicating that the effective date of the Track I final rule was delayed until further notice due to funding limitations. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act includes provisions for prioritized examination that emulate the requirements of the Office's Track I final rule, with revised fee amounts for prioritized examination (including a small entity discount) and a provision that addresses the funding limitations that required a delay in the implementation of the Track I final rule. This final rule implements the prioritized examination provisions of section 11(h) of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act.
Request for Comments on Establishment of a One-Year Retention Period for Trademark-Related Papers That Have Been Scanned Into the Trademark Initial Capture Registration System
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') is considering establishing a retention period of one year for trademark- related documents submitted on paper that are subsequently scanned into the Trademark Initial Capture Registration System (``TICRS''). TICRS is available to the public through the Trademark Document Retrieval (``TDR'') database on the USPTO Web site. After the expiration of the one-year retention period, the USPTO would dispose of the paper documents unless, within sufficient time prior to disposal, the relevant trademark applicant or owner files a request to correct the electronic record in TICRS, and the request remains outstanding at the time disposal would otherwise have occurred. Specifically, the proposed one-year retention period begins on: September 26, 2011, for papers scanned into TICRS prior to September 26, 2011; or a paper's submission date, for papers scanned into TICRS on or after September 26, 2011. The proposal would reduce the costs currently associated with indefinitely warehousing paper documents, while permitting sufficient time for the review and rarely needed correction of the scanning of such paper documents.
Revision of Standard for Granting an Inter Partes Reexamination Request
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is revising the rules of practice governing inter partes reexamination to implement a transition provision of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act that changes the standard for granting a request for inter partes reexamination. The Office is also revising the rules governing inter partes reexamination to reflect the termination of inter partes reexamination effective September 16, 2012, which is provided for in the Act. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act replaces inter partes reexamination by a new inter partes review process effective one year after the date of enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (i.e., September 16, 2012), and provides that any request for inter partes reexamination filed on or after September 16, 2011, will not be granted unless the information presented in the request establishes that there is a reasonable likelihood that the requester will prevail with respect to at least one of the claims challenged in the request. This replaces the prior standard for granting a request for inter partes reexamination that required a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) affecting any claim of the patent raised by the request. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act does not revise the SNQ standard for granting an ex parte reexamination request.
Extension of Comment Period for Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Changes in Requirements for Specimens and for Affidavits or Declarations of Continued Use or Excusable Nonuse in Trademark Cases
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') is extending until September 23, 2011, the period for public comment on the proposal to revise the Trademark Rules of Practice and the Rules of Practice for Filings Pursuant to the Madrid Protocol to permit the USPTO to require: any information, exhibits, and affidavits or declarations deemed reasonably necessary to examine an affidavit or declaration of continued use or excusable nonuse in trademark cases, or for the USPTO to assess the accuracy and integrity of the register; and upon request, more than one specimen in connection with a use-based trademark application, an allegation of use, an amendment to a registered mark, or an affidavit or declaration of continued use in trademark cases.
Recording Assignments
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Rules for Patent Maintenance Fees
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Patent and Trademark Resource Centers Metrics
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on this new information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Establishing a One-Year Retention Period for Patent-Related Papers That Have Been Scanned Into the Image File Wrapper System or the Supplemental Complex Repository for Examiners
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is considering establishing a retention period of one year for patent- related papers that have been scanned into the Image File Wrapper system (IFW) or the Supplemental Complex Repository for Examiners (SCORE). Specifically, the USPTO is considering establishing a one-year retention period that begins on September 1, 2011, for papers scanned into IFW or SCORE prior to September 1, 2011; or a paper's submission date, for papers scanned into IFW or SCORE on or after September 1, 2011. After the expiration of the one-year retention period (after September 1, 2012, or later), the USPTO would dispose of the paper unless, within sufficient time prior to disposal of the paper, the relevant patent applicant, patent owner, or reexamination party files a bona fide request to correct the electronic record of the paper in IFW or SCORE, and the request remains outstanding at the time disposal of the paper would have otherwise occurred. Establishing a one-year retention period for papers scanned into IFW or SCORE would replace the USPTO's past practice of indefinitely retaining the papers, which has been rendered unnecessary and cost-ineffective by improvements in scanning and indexing.
Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Certificate Action Form
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Revision of the Materiality to Patentability Standard for the Duty To Disclose Information in Patent Applications
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or PTO) is proposing to revise the standard for materiality for the duty to disclose information in patent applications and reexamination proceedings in light of the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit or Court) in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. Specifically, the Office is proposing to revise the materiality standard for the duty to disclose to match the materiality standard, as defined in Therasense, for the inequitable conduct doctrine. While Therasense does not require the Office to harmonize the materiality standards underlying the duty of disclosure and the inequitable conduct doctrine, the Office believes that there are important reasons to do so. The materiality standard set forth in Therasense should reduce the frequency with which applicants and practitioners are being charged with inequitable conduct, consequently reducing the incentive to submit information disclosure statements containing marginally relevant information and enabling applicants to be more forthcoming and helpful to the Office. At the same time, it should also continue to prevent fraud on the Office and other egregious forms of misconduct. Additionally, harmonization of the materiality standards is simpler for the patent system as a whole.
Statutory Invention Registration
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the revision of a continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) Program
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Trademark Board Manual of Procedure, Third Edition
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (``USPTO'') issued the third edition of the Trademark Board Manual of Procedure (``TBMP'') on May 6, 2011.
Revision of Patent Fees for Fiscal Year 2012
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) is proposing to adjust certain patent fee amounts for fiscal year 2012 to reflect fluctuations in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The patent statute provides for the annual CPI adjustment of patent fees set by statute to recover the higher costs associated with doing business.
Applications for Trademark Registration
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the extension of a continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Patent and Trademark Financial Transactions
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the continuing information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
Admittance to Practice and Roster of Registered Patent Attorneys and Agents Admitted to Practice Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) (Proposed Addition)
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), as part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, invites the general public and other Federal agencies to take this opportunity to comment on the revision of a currently approved collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13 (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)).
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
