Standard Protective Order

Disagree with In-House Counsel and Overdesignation sections

Norvell IP appreciates the opportunity to submit comments to the PTO’s proposed changes to the TTAB Standard Protective Order. Our comments are as follows:

1. We disagree with automatically excluding in-house counsel from access to Attorneys’ Eyes Only information. Many in-house attorneys handle TM enforcement proceedings directly and as attorneys they are bound by ethical obligations to maintain the confidential nature of the information, so no blanket exclusion is necessary. (Sections 1, 3)

2. We also disagree with the unilateral power given to the Board to determine whether there has been an over-designation, and the lack of opportunity for appeal. This can be addressed by first requiring an order to show cause, and affording the parties the right to appeal, with an automatic stay. (Section 15)

Tags

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active
Idea No. 25