| Moatz, Harry
From: Mark. Costello@...
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 4:10 PM
To: ethicsrules comments
Subject: Changes to Representation of Others Before the United
States Patent and Trademark
Office
To: ethicsrules.comments@uspto.gov
Subject: Changes to Representation of Others Before the United
States
Patent and Trademark Office
Attention: Harry I. Moatz
The United States Patent and Trademark Office has proposed
new rules for Representation of Others Before the United States
Patent and Trademark
Office, published in the Federal Register on December 12,
2003 (68 Fed. Reg. 69442). Xerox Corporation desires to comment
on one of the proposed new rules in Subparts A - C of 37 C.F.R.
Part 11. Xerox Corporation is a U.S.-based Fortune 500 company
with headquarters in Stamford, Connecticut, and facilities
at locations in the United States and in other countries.
Xerox Corporation operates research and technology
centers in the United States (including Webster (Rochester),
New York, Palo Alto, California, and E1 Segundo, California),
Canada and Europe. People at these research and technology
centers conduct work in color science, computing, digital
imaging, work practices, electromechanical systems, novel
materials and other disciplines connected to Xerox's expertise
in printing and document management. The company consistently
builds its inventions
into business by embedding them in superior Xerox products
and solutions, using them as the foundation of new businesses,
or licensing or selling them
to other entities. In 2003, Xerox (including its PARC subsidiary)
received 628 United States patents. Xerox consistently ranks
among the top 30 organizations receiving United States patents.
Xerox employs approximately 30 patent practitioners in its
in-house Intellectual Property Law Department, and engages
the services of several external lawyers and law firms.
Proposed Rule 11.13(g)(4) - Approved Continuing Education
Providers or Sponsors Xerox Corporation submits that Proposed
Rule 11.13(g)(4), which specifically bars law firms, professional
corporations, and corporate law departments from becoming
approved sponsors of USPTO-approved continuing education programs,
is unduly restrictive . Law firms and corporate law departments
are some of the best-suited potential providers of relevant,
effective continuing education, particularly for their members
and clients. The law firm or corporate law department can
tailor their programs to specifically address the application
of the law and rules to the particular environment of that
law firm or corporate law department, or to a particular client.
Such particular application increases the likelihood that
the new rules and USPTO procedures will be uniformly and correctly
implemented at the law firm or corporation. To support effective
application of rules and procedures in law firms and corporate
law departments, the USPTO should encourage those law firms
and corporate law departments to develop internal continuing
education programs. Therefore, Xerox Corporation urges the
USPTO to permit law firms and corporate law departments to
become approved sponsors of USPTO-approved continuing education
programs by removing the restriction of Proposed Rule 11.13(g)(4).
Conclusion Xerox Corporation appreciates this opportunity
to comment on proposed rules.
Mark Costello
General Patent Counsel
Xerox Corporation
1 |