Thanks for the great information as usual. I should know better than to opine on attorney obligations by now, as I have never studied for the bar exams. Best wishes for a Happy New Year, and thanks for all of the great articles!

Stan~

Stan,

You’re correct that it has to be done at the state level, and is generally automatic, as most (if not all) states have “reciprocity” rules that say if you’re disbarred/disciplined in one jurisdiction (e.g., the USPTO), you’ll be automatically disciplined in that state’s jurisdiction.

The USPTO can disbar patent attorneys from practicing before them for ethical violations, but that really doesn’t pull their basic attorney license as far as I am aware of. I believe that has to be done at the state level, which is perhaps why they are approaching it in this manner. I have heard of an attorney claiming to be a patent practitioner, when in fact he had lost his license to practice before the USPTO many years ago due to ethical violations. He can still chase ambulances, but he cannot represent inventors as a patent attorney before the USPTO for the foreseeable future. When an attorney has had his USPTO license first suspended, and then later revoked about 4 years later, the prognosis doesn’t seem very attractive.

Stan~

This seems to be a new phenomenon. I have seen it in a few cases that OED has handled this year where they took the step of specifically excluding an attorney from trademark and non-patent related matters before the Office. I’m not sure why they are doing this. The non-patent practitioners that they really need to concern themselves with are the non-lawyers who openly engage in the practice of law without any repercussions.

-Gene