37 CFR 11.11 - Administrative suspension, inactivation, resignation, and readmission.
Title 37 published on 2012-07-01
The following are only the Rules published in the Federal Register after the published date of Title 37.
For a complete list of all Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices view the Rulemaking tab.
GPO FDSys XML | Text type regulations.gov FR Doc. 2012-18530 RIN 0651-AC66 Docket No. PTO-P-2011-0072 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, United States Patent and Trademark Office Final rule. Effective date: The changes in this final rule are effective on September 16, 2012. 37 CFR Parts 1, 5, 10, 11, and 41 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) expands the scope of information that any party may cite in a patent file to include written statements of a patent owner filed in a proceeding before a Federal court or the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) regarding the scope of any claim of the patent, and provides for how such information may be considered in ex parte reexamination, inter partes review, and post grant review. The AIA also provides for an estoppel that may attach with respect to the filing of an ex parte reexamination request subsequent to a final written decision in an inter partes review or post grant review proceeding. The Office is revising the rules of practice to implement these post-patent provisions, as well as other miscellaneous provisions, of the AIA.
GPO FDSys XML | Text type regulations.gov FR Doc. 2012-18554 RIN 0651-AC76 Docket No. PTO-C-2011-0089 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, United States Patent and Trademark Office Final rule. Effective Date: The changes in this final rule are effective on August 30, 2012. 37 CFR Part 11 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) requires that disciplinary proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) be commenced not later than the earlier of either the date that is 10 years after the date on which the misconduct forming the basis of the proceeding occurred, or one year from the date on which the misconduct forming the basis of the proceeding was made known to an officer or employee of the Office, as prescribed in the regulations governing disciplinary proceedings. The Office is adopting procedural rules which: Specify that a disciplinary complaint shall be filed within one year after the date on which the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) Director receives a grievance forming the basis of the complaint, and in no event more than ten years after the date on which the misconduct forming the basis for the proceeding occurred; define grievance as a written submission from any source received by the OED Director that presents possible grounds for discipline of a specified practitioner; and clarify that the one-year time frame for filing a complaint may be tolled by written agreement. The Office will evaluate these procedures in the future to determine their effectiveness. If the new one-year time frame proves to be administratively unworkable or impedes the effectiveness of the disciplinary process, the Office may issue a new notice of proposed rulemaking.
This is a list of United States Code sections, Statutes at Large, Public Laws, and Presidential Documents, which provide rulemaking authority for this CFR Part.
This list is taken from the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules provided by GPO [Government Printing Office].
It is not guaranteed to be accurate or up-to-date, though we do refresh the database weekly. More limitations on accuracy are described at the GPO site.
§ 500 - Administrative practice; general provisions
§ 1123 - Rules and regulations for conduct of proceedings in Patent and Trademark Office
§ 2 - Powers and duties
§ 32 - Suspension or exclusion from practice
§ 41 - Patent fees; patent and trademark search systems
Title 37 published on 2012-07-01
The following are ALL rules, proposed rules, and notices (chronologically) published in the Federal Register relating to 37 CFR 11 after this date.
GPO FDSys XML | Text type regulations.gov FR Doc. 2013-07382 RIN 0651-AC81 Docket No. PTO-C-2012-0034 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Patent and Trademark Office Final rule. Effective Date: May 3, 2013. 37 CFR Parts 1, 2, 7, 10, 11 and 41 The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) is adopting the new USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct (USPTO Rules), which are based on the American Bar Association's (ABA) Model Rules of Professional Conduct (ABA Model Rules), which were published in 1983, substantially revised in 2003 and updated through 2012. The Office has also revised the existing procedural rules governing disciplinary investigations and proceedings. These changes will enable the Office to better protect the public while also providing practitioners with substantially uniform disciplinary rules across multiple jurisdictions.
GPO FDSys XML | Text type regulations.gov FR Doc. 2012-25355 RIN 0651-AC81 Docket No. PTO-C-2012-0034 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, United States Patent and Trademark Office Notice of proposed rulemaking. To be ensured of consideration, written comments must be received on or before December 17, 2012. 37 CFR Parts 1, 2, 7, 10, 11 and 41 The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) proposes to align the USPTO's professional responsibility rules with those of most other U.S. jurisdictions by replacing the current Patent and Trademark Office Code of Professional Responsibility, adopted in 1985, based on the 1980 version of the Model Code of Professional Responsibility of the American Bar Association (“ABA”), with new USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, which are based on the Model Rules of Professional Conduct of the ABA, which were published in 1983, substantially revised in 2003 and updated through 2011. Changes approved by the ABA House of Delegates in August 2012 have not been incorporated in these proposed rules. The Office also proposes to revise the existing procedural rules governing disciplinary investigations and proceedings.
GPO FDSys XML | Text type regulations.gov FR Doc. 2012-18530 RIN 0651-AC66 Docket No. PTO-P-2011-0072 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, United States Patent and Trademark Office Final rule. Effective date: The changes in this final rule are effective on September 16, 2012. 37 CFR Parts 1, 5, 10, 11, and 41 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) expands the scope of information that any party may cite in a patent file to include written statements of a patent owner filed in a proceeding before a Federal court or the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) regarding the scope of any claim of the patent, and provides for how such information may be considered in ex parte reexamination, inter partes review, and post grant review. The AIA also provides for an estoppel that may attach with respect to the filing of an ex parte reexamination request subsequent to a final written decision in an inter partes review or post grant review proceeding. The Office is revising the rules of practice to implement these post-patent provisions, as well as other miscellaneous provisions, of the AIA.
GPO FDSys XML | Text type regulations.gov FR Doc. 2012-18554 RIN 0651-AC76 Docket No. PTO-C-2011-0089 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, United States Patent and Trademark Office Final rule. Effective Date: The changes in this final rule are effective on August 30, 2012. 37 CFR Part 11 The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) requires that disciplinary proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office or USPTO) be commenced not later than the earlier of either the date that is 10 years after the date on which the misconduct forming the basis of the proceeding occurred, or one year from the date on which the misconduct forming the basis of the proceeding was made known to an officer or employee of the Office, as prescribed in the regulations governing disciplinary proceedings. The Office is adopting procedural rules which: Specify that a disciplinary complaint shall be filed within one year after the date on which the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED) Director receives a grievance forming the basis of the complaint, and in no event more than ten years after the date on which the misconduct forming the basis for the proceeding occurred; define grievance as a written submission from any source received by the OED Director that presents possible grounds for discipline of a specified practitioner; and clarify that the one-year time frame for filing a complaint may be tolled by written agreement. The Office will evaluate these procedures in the future to determine their effectiveness. If the new one-year time frame proves to be administratively unworkable or impedes the effectiveness of the disciplinary process, the Office may issue a new notice of proposed rulemaking.