USPTO Chiefs to In-House Counsel: We Want to Hear From You
Lawyers from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office told a group of in-house counsel at the ACC annual meeting that the agency wants to let in-house counsel know how it can assist with their companies' IP-related concerns.
October 29, 2019 at 06:20 PM
4 minute read
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is revving up correspondence with in-house counsel to let them know how the agency can help meet their intellectual property needs, according to a panel of IP regulators at the annual meeting of the Association of Corporate Counsel in Phoenix on Tuesday.
The panel included Mary Boney Denison, the USPTO's commissioner for trademarks, and Molly Kocialski, the director of the USPTO Rocky Mountain Regional Office based in Denver. Denison and Kocialski said the agency wants to increase communications with in-house counsel to promote how they can be of assistance as patent and trademark filings remain high.
"It was part of what we did, but now it's more focused," said Kocialski of the heightened outreach effort to in-house counsel, in an interview. She added regional directors such as herself have proactively reached out more to in-house counsel to offer assistance over the past fiscal year.
Kocialski told the group of about 60 in-house counsel in the audience that if they receive a call or an email from a regional director out of the blue, it most likely means the director wants to connect, such as visit the company, to address any IP-related questions.
"Our main focus, USPTO as a whole, was always on IP attorneys," she said. "We never made the distinction between outside counsel and in-house counsel, but in-house counsel are the decision-makers." Kocialski said the outreach resonates with her as a former in-house lawyer with 15 years of experience; her agency biography lists Oracle America Inc. and Qwest Corp. as previous employers.
According to the 2018 USPTO Performance and Accountability Report, patent filings have decreased by 7,001 filings from 2017 to 2018, with the agency seeing 643,349 filings last year, down from the prior year's 650,350. But Kocialski said the agency is strengthening its focus on communications with lawyers at corporations, because that's where the majority of inventors are.
"Director [Andrei] Iancu wanted to change the IP conversation," Kocialski said. "We don't change the IP conversation in our office. We change it by having it."
Kocialski said she has notified small companies when she would be in their area—her office covers Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming—and enjoyed the visits with these companies where she saw firsthand how their patents and trademarks drive the business.
"The biggest quote that comes out of this is, 'We didn't know the USPTO did this,'" she said.
For trademarks, Denison said she was "specifically asked" to let in-house lawyers know they, too, can submit comments to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, even if their bar associations had submitted their own comments.
"Sometimes the bar groups comment, and you may or may not agree with them, so we would love to hear from you," she told the audience. "Last year, we had put out, I think, twice a request for comments from in-house counsel on a protective order, and we really didn't get very many comments. If you're in-house counsel and you have comments, please feel free to still send them to us because we're still talking about what to do. It's not just that, it's really anything that we're doing we want to hear from you."
In 2018, TTAB's website shows the board received comments from four entities on its standard protective order that would allow in-house counsel access to information and materials designated as confidential, "for attorneys' eyes only," upon a showing and approval by the board. With a split in opinion among the commenters, the board had extended the comment period to June 30, 2019.
Denison, who joined the agency in 2011 and will be retiring Dec. 31, added the USPTO would also like feedback on its surveys from in-house counsel. Over her tenure, trademark filings have increased every year, according to the agency's 2018 report, with 673,233 filings by the Sept. 30 fiscal year-end, up 5% from last year's 638,847 filings.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllElaine Darr Brings Transformation and Value to DHL's Business
PepsiCo's Legal Team Champions Diversity, Wellness, and Mentorship to Shape a Thriving Corporate Culture
'You Can’t Do a First Draft of Common Sense': Microsoft GC Jon Palmer Talks AI, Litigation, and Leadership
'Everything Leaves a Digital Footprint': How to Navigate the Complexities of Internal Investigations
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250