All use of the Internet by Patent Organization employees, contractors, and consultants shall be conducted in a manner that ensures compliance with confidentiality requirements in statutes, including 35 U.S.C. 122, and regulations. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant for the USPTO to communicate with the applicant via email, communications via email may be used.

All use of the Internet by Patent Organization employees, contractors, and consultants shall be conducted in a manner that ensures compliance with confidentiality requirements in statutes, including 35 U.S.C. 122, and regulations. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant for the USPTO to communicate with the applicant via email, communications via email may be used.

A reply to an Office action or a paper requiring a signature may NOT be communicated by applicant to the USPTO via email even if written authorization is on record. In order to ensure security and authorization for replies to Office actions and papers that require a signature, such replies and papers must be filed electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see MPEP § 502.05) or in paper. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant, communications via email, other than replies to Office Actions under 35 U.S.C. 132 or papers that require a signature, may be used. In such case, a printed copy of the email communications MUST be entered into One Patent Service Gateway (via Patent Data Portal) and entered in the patent application file (Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply to avoid abandonment under 35 U.S.C. 133 and 37 CFR 1.135. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED.

A reply to an Office action or a paper requiring a signature may NOT be communicated by applicant to the USPTO via email even if written authorization is on record. In order to ensure security and authorization for replies to Office actions and papers that require a signature, such replies and papers must be filed electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see MPEP § 502.05) or in paper. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant, communications via email, other than replies to Office Actions under 35 U.S.C. 132 or papers that require a signature, may be used. In such case, a printed copy of the email communications MUST be entered into One Patent Service Gateway (via Patent Data Portal) and entered in the patent application file (Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply to avoid abandonment under 35 U.S.C. 133 and 37 CFR 1.135. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED.

Similar to the policy set forth in MPEP 100 for handling telephone calls, when responding to an email, no information should be disclosed until the identity of the requester can be adequately verified. Examiners should verify the identity of the person by checking Patent Data Portal or the application file, such as checking the email address previously provided in Patent Data Portal or the application.

Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via email to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. A paper copy of such correspondence and response will be placed in the appropriate patent application by the examiner. Except for correspondence that only sets up an interview time, all correspondence between the Office and the applicant including applicant's representative must be placed in the appropriate patent application. If an email contains any information beyond scheduling an interview, such as an interview agenda, it must be placed in the application. The written authorization may be submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, mail, or fax. It cannot be submitted by email.

Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via email to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. A paper copy of such correspondence and response will be placed in the appropriate patent application by the examiner. Except for correspondence that only sets up an interview time, all correspondence between the Office and the applicant including applicant's representative must be placed in the appropriate patent application. If an email contains any information beyond scheduling an interview, such as an interview agenda, it must be placed in the application. The written authorization may be submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, mail, or fax. It cannot be submitted by email.

Without a written authorization by applicant in place, the USPTO will not respond via email to any Internet correspondence which contains information subject to the confidentiality requirement as set forth in 35 U.S.C. 122. A paper copy of such correspondence and response will be placed in the appropriate patent application by the examiner. Except for correspondence that only sets up an interview time, all correspondence between the Office and the applicant including applicant's representative must be placed in the appropriate patent application. If an email contains any information beyond scheduling an interview, such as an interview agenda, it must be placed in the application. The written authorization may be submitted via the USPTO patent electronic filing system, mail, or fax. It cannot be submitted by email.

Email and instant messaging shall NOT be used to conduct an exchange of communications similar to those exchanged during telephone or personal interviews unless a written authorization has been given under Patent Internet Usage Policy Article 5 to use Internet email. In such cases, a paper copy of the Internet email or instant messaging contents MUST be made and placed in the patent application file, as required by the Federal Records Act, in the same manner as an Examiner Interview Summary Form is entered.

Email and instant messaging shall NOT be used to conduct an exchange of communications similar to those exchanged during telephone or personal interviews unless a written authorization has been given under Patent Internet Usage Policy Article 5 to use Internet email. In such cases, a paper copy of the Internet email or instant messaging contents MUST be made and placed in the patent application file, as required by the Federal Records Act, in the same manner as an Examiner Interview Summary Form is entered.

“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”

“Recognizing that Internet communications are not secure, I hereby authorize the USPTO to communicate with the undersigned and practitioners in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application by video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail. I understand that a copy of these communications will be made of record in the application file.”

“The authorization given on______, to the USPTO to communicate with any practitioner of record or acting in a representative capacity in accordance with 37 CFR 1.33 and 37 CFR 1.34 concerning any subject matter of this application via video conferencing, instant messaging, or electronic mail is hereby withdrawn.”

A written authorization may be withdrawn by filing a signed paper clearly identifying the original authorization. The following is a sample form which may be used by applicant to withdraw the authorization:

A written authorization may be withdrawn by filing a signed paper clearly identifying the original authorization. The following is a sample form which may be used by applicant to withdraw the authorization:

All reissue applications are open to public inspection under 37 CFR 1.11(a) and all papers relating to a reexamination proceeding which have been entered of record in the patent or reexamination file are open to public inspection under 37 CFR 1.11(d). USPTO employees are NOT permitted to initiate communications with applicant in a reissue application or a patentee of a reexamination proceeding via email unless written authorization is given by the applicant or patentee.

All reissue applications are open to public inspection under 37 CFR 1.11(a) and all papers relating to a reexamination proceeding which have been entered of record in the patent or reexamination file are open to public inspection under 37 CFR 1.11(d). USPTO employees are NOT permitted to initiate communications with applicant in a reissue application or a patentee of a reexamination proceeding via email unless written authorization is given by the applicant or patentee.

USPTO video conferencing tools may be used to conduct examiner interviews in both published and unpublished applications under the Patent Internet Usage Policy. Authorization by the practitioner is required and must be obtained prior to sending a meeting invite using an official USPTO communication link or tools. Authorization is required to confirm that the practitioner is able to conduct a video conferencing interview and to confirm the email address to which the invitation must be sent. The practitioner’s participation in the interview is considered consent to the use of the video conferencing tool for the interview.

USPTO video conferencing tools may be used to conduct examiner interviews in both published and unpublished applications under the Patent Internet Usage Policy. Authorization by the practitioner is required and must be obtained prior to sending a meeting invite using an official USPTO communication link or tools. Authorization is required to confirm that the practitioner is able to conduct a video conferencing interview and to confirm the email address to which the invitation must be sent. The practitioner’s participation in the interview is considered consent to the use of the video conferencing tool for the interview.

USPTO video conferencing tools may be used to conduct examiner interviews in both published and unpublished applications under the Patent Internet Usage Policy. Authorization by the practitioner is required and must be obtained prior to sending a meeting invite using an official USPTO communication link or tools. Authorization is required to confirm that the practitioner is able to conduct a video conferencing interview and to confirm the email address to which the invitation must be sent. The practitioner’s participation in the interview is considered consent to the use of the video conferencing tool for the interview.

USPTO video conferencing tools may be used to conduct examiner interviews in both published and unpublished applications under the Patent Internet Usage Policy. Authorization by the practitioner is required and must be obtained prior to sending a meeting invite using an official USPTO communication link or tools. Authorization is required to confirm that the practitioner is able to conduct a video conferencing interview and to confirm the email address to which the invitation must be sent. The practitioner’s participation in the interview is considered consent to the use of the video conferencing tool for the interview.

Within the Patent Organization, any questions regarding Internet usage policy should be directed to the user’s immediate supervisor. Non-USPTO personnel should direct their questions to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Patents who oversees the Office of Petitions or assigned staff in the Office of Petitions, the Office of Patent Legal Administration, and the MPEP Staff Office.

Within the Patent Organization, any questions regarding Internet usage policy should be directed to the user’s immediate supervisor. Non-USPTO personnel should direct their questions to the Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Patents who oversees the Office of Petitions or assigned staff in the Office of Petitions, the Office of Patent Legal Administration, and the MPEP Staff Office.

A reply to an Office action or a paper requiring a signature may NOT be communicated by applicant to the USPTO via email even if written authorization is on record. In order to ensure security and authorization for replies to Office actions and papers that require a signature, such replies and papers must be filed electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see MPEP § 502.05) or in paper. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant, communications via email, other than replies to Office Actions under 35 U.S.C. 132 or papers that require a signature, may be used. In such case, a printed copy of the email communications MUST be entered into One Patent Service Gateway (via Patent Data Portal) and entered in the patent application file (Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply to avoid abandonment under 35 U.S.C. 133 and 37 CFR 1.135. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED.

A reply to an Office action or a paper requiring a signature may NOT be communicated by applicant to the USPTO via email even if written authorization is on record. In order to ensure security and authorization for replies to Office actions and papers that require a signature, such replies and papers must be filed electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see MPEP § 502.05) or in paper. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant, communications via email, other than replies to Office Actions under 35 U.S.C. 132 or papers that require a signature, may be used. In such case, a printed copy of the email communications MUST be entered into One Patent Service Gateway (via Patent Data Portal) and entered in the patent application file (Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply to avoid abandonment under 35 U.S.C. 133 and 37 CFR 1.135. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED.

A reply to an Office action or a paper requiring a signature may NOT be communicated by applicant to the USPTO via email even if written authorization is on record. In order to ensure security and authorization for replies to Office actions and papers that require a signature, such replies and papers must be filed electronically using the USPTO patent electronic filing system (see MPEP § 502.05) or in paper. Where a written authorization is given by the applicant, communications via email, other than replies to Office Actions under 35 U.S.C. 132 or papers that require a signature, may be used. In such case, a printed copy of the email communications MUST be entered into One Patent Service Gateway (via Patent Data Portal) and entered in the patent application file (Doc Code is EMAIL). If a reply to an Office action is improperly submitted by applicant via email, the email submission will not be accepted as an adequate reply to avoid abandonment under 35 U.S.C. 133 and 37 CFR 1.135. A copy of the email submission will be placed in the appropriate patent application file with an indication that the reply is NOT ENTERED.

Email must be initiated by a registered practitioner, or an applicant in a pro se application, and sufficient information must be provided to show representative capacity in compliance with 37 CFR 1.34. Examples of such information include the attorney registration number, attorney docket number, and patent application number.

Similar to the policy set forth in MPEP 100 for handling telephone calls, when responding to an email, no information should be disclosed until the identity of the requester can be adequately verified. Examiners should verify the identity of the person by checking Patent Data Portal or the application file, such as checking the email address previously provided in Patent Data Portal or the application.