Campaign: Standard Protective Order

Standard Protective Order

I have to say that your comment site and procedure are utterly baffling. I have no idea whether I am actually commenting on what I want to comment on. I think that the Standard Protective Order concept is a good one. However, I have several issues based on my experience as both in-house and as outside counsel. If a party to a Board proceeding wants to be represented by in-house counsel that is fine with me. But I ...more »

Submitted by (@paul00)

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Campaign: Standard Protective Order

Standard Protective Order

I have to say that your comment site and procedure are utterly baffling. I have no idea whether I am actually commenting on what I want to comment on. I think that the Standard Protective Order concept is a good one. However, I have several issues based on my experience as both in-house and as outside counsel. If a party to a Board proceeding wants to be represented by in-house counsel that is fine with me. But I ...more »

Submitted by (@paul00)

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Campaign: Standard Protective Order

Standard Protective Order

I have to say that your comment site and procedure are utterly baffling. I have no idea whether I am actually commenting on what I want to comment on. I think that the Standard Protective Order concept is a good one. However, I have several issues based on my experience as both in-house and as outside counsel. If a party to a Board proceeding wants to be represented by in-house counsel that is fine with me. But I ...more »

Submitted by (@paul00)

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Campaign: Standard Protective Order

Standard Protective Order

I have to say that your comment site and procedure are utterly baffling. I have no idea whether I am actually commenting on what I want to comment on. I think that the Standard Protective Order concept is a good one. However, I have several issues based on my experience as both in-house and as outside counsel. If a party to a Board proceeding wants to be represented by in-house counsel that is fine with me. But I ...more »

Submitted by (@paul00)

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Campaign: Standard Protective Order

Enforcement

If we are reacting to the version of the Standard Protective agreement in its form about six months ago, I would not permit in-house counsel to keep archival copies of an opponent's confidential or attorneys only information after the case terminates, no matter what. I would also add a provision that the agreement can be enforced in US District Court. If it is believed that there is a potential problem with a breach ...more »

Submitted by (@dbrezina)

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Campaign: 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 ...more »

Submitted by (@kathleenebrennan)

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active