Justia Connect

This presentation provides a concise overview of key regulatory and ethical considerations for practitioners interacting with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). We will explore the USPTO's regulatory power, the crucial role of the Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED), and the critical obligations of candor owed to the USPTO. We will delve into the complexities of inequitable conduct allegations, highlighting specific areas of concern arising in recent case law. Furthermore, we will address the implications of subject matter conflicts and touch upon other current hot topics impacting intellectual property practice. This session is designed to equip practitioners with the knowledge necessary to navigate the evolving landscape of USPTO regulations and maintain the highest ethical standards.Topics covered include: EthicsAgenda:USPTO’s Regulatory PowerOverview of the USPTO’s authority and scope of regulationRelevant statutes and rules governing patent and trademark practiceImpact of USPTO regulations on practitioners and applicantsRole of the OEDMission and responsibilities of the Office of Enrollment and DisciplineOED’s oversight of registered patent attorneys and agentsDisciplinary procedures and consequences for misconductObligations of Candor to the USPTODuty of disclosure and good faith in dealings with the USPTORequirements for information disclosure statements (IDS)Consequences of failing to fulfill calendar obligationsAllegations of Inequitable Conduct and Specific Areas of Concern in Recent CasesDefinition and elements of inequitable conductAnalysis of recent case law highlighting problematic conductPractical tips for avoiding allegations of inequitable conductSubject Matter ConflictsUnderstanding subject matter conflicts in patent prosecutionEthical considerations related to representing clients with conflicting interestsStrategies for managing and resolving subject matter conflictsOther Hot Topics in IP PracticeBrief overview of emerging trends and challenges in IP lawDiscussion of potential implications for practitionersResources for staying informed about developments in IP practiceQuestions & Answers (as time permits)Speaker: Emil J. Ali, McCabe & Ali, LLP.

ABA Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.3 and its many state counterparts require lawyers to inform the appropriate professional authority once a lawyer 'knows' another lawyer has engaged in certain professional misconduct. Knowledge of such violations can vary depending on the relationship between the lawyers in question. This program will consider the provisions of Model Rule 8.3 and an attorney’s obligations to report another attorney or judge to the appropriate regulatory authority. The speaker will discuss when specific reporting is triggered, the consequences of acting or failing to act, and best practices for taking effective action. The speaker will also explore what information is reported and to whom, the duty to self-report his/her/their own misconduct or that of an associate, and duties to report an impaired or suspended, disbarred or out-of-state lawyer.Topics covered include:EthicsAgenda:Model Rule 8.3(a): Reporting Professional MisconductThe language of the rule and state variationsConfusion over the Rule’s use and applicationAttorneys as mandated reportersHow does this play out: Define the elementModel Rule 8.3(b): Reporting Professional MisconductModel Rule 8.3(c): Reporting Professional MisconductIntersection of Model Rule 8.3(c) and Model Rule 1.6Model Rule 8.3(c) & lawyer assistance programsExample ScenariosCautionary Case TalesIn Re Himmel, 25 Ill.2d 531, 533 N.E.2d 790 (Ill. 1988)In re Riehlmann, 891 So. 2d 1239 (2005)Implicating myself?Implicating my partners?Reporting suspended/out-of-state lawyer?Questions & Answers (as time permits)Duration of this webinar: 60 minutesWhen: Premieres in 6 days | March 31, 2025 10:00 AM PTSpeaker: Tracy L. Kepler, Director of Risk Control Consulting, CNA's Lawyers Insurance Program.