Lucinda G. Price

Moatz, Harry
From: lucindagrace@...
Sent: Saturday, December 13, 2003 12:45 PM
To: ethicsrules comments
Cc: lucindagrace@...
Subject: Proposed Ct_E for Patent attorneys/agents

To whom it may concern,

While I am not opposed to CLE for patent attorneys, I don't believe that the proposed CLE program is the only way to conduct a beneficial CLE program.

Please consider the following:

1. Allow AIPLA, and local IPLA chapters (and other patent or IP related groups) to conduct PTO approved CLE seminars.
2. Have an on-line "on your honor" system where we can log in and indicate that they we took the required classes.
3. Reserve the right for the PTO to conduct "audits" of individuals actual attendance at CLE functions,such that it is the individual's responsibility to
retain ALL the necessary paperwork.

Benefits: 1. Tried and True methods of conducting CLE programs (e.g. the CA bar conducts the CLE program in a similar manner.)
2. Gives the attorneys/agents maximum flexibility and trust.
3. The PTO is not responsible for retaining records, or regulating the CLE, or making sure that the computer program works (especially on the last day CLE is due!) ?? all 28,000 or so agents/attorneys are not relying on the PTO and the PTO website to function in order to maintain their registration.
4. Each attorney/agent is responsible for their own CLE records and class.
5. Gives attys ability to use the PTO CLE class for state bar CLE as well.

I urge you to reconsider your proposals, in favor of what I have suggested.

Sincerely,
Lucinda G Price
42,270