USPTO Leadership
- Drew Hirshfeld is still performing the functions and duties of Director. Kathi Vidal, the Biden Administration's nominee to be the next Director, testified at the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing considering her nomination on December 1.
USPTO News
- On November 30, the National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC) and the USPTO released a series of ads informing younger buyers and their parents about the serious dangers of buying fake goods.
Notices, Guidance, and Requests
- There are no new notices, guidance or requests.
Final Rules
- Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees During Fiscal Year 2020, 86 Fed. Reg. 66192 (Nov. 22, 2021) (delaying the effective date for a fee for patent applications that are not filed in DOCX format by one year, from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023).
- Changes to Implement Provisions of the Trademark Modernization Act, 86 Fed. Reg. 64300 (Nov. 17, 2021) (amending the rules of practice for trademark cases to implement provision of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 (TMA)) (Press release).
Interim Rules
- There are no interim rules.
Proposed Rules
- Date of Receipt of Electronic Submissions of Patent Correspondence, 86 Fed. Reg. 69195 (Dec. 7, 2021) [Written comments period closes February 7, 2022] (proposing to amend the patent rules of practice to provide that the receipt date of correspondence submitted via EFS is the date in U.S. Eastern Time when the USPTO received the correspondence).
PTAB Decisions
- New Precedential PTAB Decisions
- There are no new informative PTAB decisions.
- New Informative PTAB Decisions
- There are no new informative PTAB decisions.
New Requests for POP Review
There were three new requests for POP review:
- AutoStore System Inc. v. Ocado Innovation Ltd. (IPR2021-00798) [Notification of Receipt of POP Requests issued December 2, 2021] [Requesting POP review of Institution Decision on the ground that “the Board adopted a construction in its institution decision that neither Petitioner nor Patent Owner proposed” and “then relied upon its construction to deny institution.”]
- Liquidia Technologies, Inc. v. United Therapeutics Corporation (IPR2020-00769) [Notification of Receipt of POP Requests issued November 9, 2021] [Requesting POP review of Final Written Decisions, presenting the question of “[w]hether the Board may rely in a final written decision on evidence that the Board itself acknowledges is not admissible, despite the opposing party's timely objection and the proponent's failure to comply with the Board's procedures for curing an evidentiary deficiency.”]
- Intel Corporation v. Health Discovery Corporation (IPR2021-00555) [Notification of Receipt of POP Requests issued November 8, 2021] [Requesting POP review of Institution Decisions, presenting the question of “[w]hether 37 C.F.R. § 42.71(c) is unconstitutional to the extent it specifies that a panel, and thus not the Director, decides rehearing requests and to the extent that it requires deference to the original panel when the Director re-hears a decision whether to institute IPR?”]
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.