What are the responsibilities of patent practitioners regarding information from other government agencies?

Patent practitioners have a responsibility to review and potentially disclose information received from other government agencies that may be material to patentability. The MPEP 2015 advises: “Similarly, each individual with a duty to disclose, or party with a duty of reasonable inquiry, should review documents it receives from other Government agencies to determine whether the…

Read More

What should patent practitioners avoid when inquiring about supplemental examinations?

Patent practitioners should avoid making improper inquiries to USPTO personnel regarding specific supplemental examination proceedings. The MPEP 2803.01 advises: “Patent practitioners (or other members of the public) must not address improper inquiries to members of the patent examining corps and to the Office as a whole.” Improper inquiries include questions about whether certain evidence was…

Read More

What should practitioners know about making inquiries to patent examiners?

Practitioners should be aware that certain inquiries to patent examiners are considered improper. The MPEP 1701 provides guidance on this matter: “Practitioners shall not make improper inquiries of members of the patent examining corps. Inquiries from members of the public relating to the matters discussed above must out of necessity be refused and such refusal…

Read More

Can an applicant appoint two patent practitioners for the same application?

Yes, an applicant can appoint two patent practitioners for the same application. However, when doing so, it’s important to specify the correspondence address. As stated in the MPEP: “If the applicant simultaneously appoints two patent practitioners, applicant should indicate with whom correspondence is to be conducted by specifying a correspondence address.” This ensures clear communication…

Read More

How is correspondence handled when two patent practitioners are appointed?

When two patent practitioners are appointed, the handling of correspondence depends on how and when they were appointed. According to MPEP 403.02: “If, after one patent practitioner is appointed, a second patent practitioner is later added by submission of a new power of attorney appointing both practitioners, correspondence will be mailed to the latest correspondence…

Read More

What happens if a new power of attorney is filed listing only one of two previously appointed patent practitioners?

When a new power of attorney is filed that lists only one of two previously appointed patent practitioners, it has significant implications. According to MPEP 403.02: “Note that if the later-filed power of attorney only lists the second practitioner, the later-filed power of attorney serves as a revocation of the earlier-filed power of attorney, even…

Read More

How does the USPTO determine the correspondence address when multiple patent practitioners are involved?

The USPTO determines the correspondence address based on the most recent information provided. According to MPEP 403.02: “If, after one patent practitioner is appointed, a second patent practitioner is later added by submission of a new power of attorney appointing both practitioners, correspondence will be mailed to the latest correspondence address of record.” This means…

Read More