318 Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 Applicable
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 provides, in part, as follows:
- (b) Representations to the Court. By presenting to the court a pleading, written motion, or other paper --whether by signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating it -- an attorney or unrepresented party certifies that to the best of the person’s knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances:
- (1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needless increase in the cost of litigation;
- (2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing law or for establishing new law;
- (3) the factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
- (4) the denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.
- (c) Sanctions.
- (1) In General. If, after notice and a reasonable opportunity to respond, the court determines that Rule 11(b) has been violated, the court may impose an appropriate sanction on any attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule or is responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm must be held jointly responsible for a violation committed by its partner, associate, or employee.
The quoted provisions are applicable to pleadings, motions, and other papers filed in inter partes proceedings before the Board. [ Note 1.] See TBMP § 527.02.
NOTES:
1. See 37 C.F.R. § 2.116(a); Emilio Pucci International BV v. Sachdev, 118 USPQ2d 1383, 1387 n.8 (TTAB 2016) (standards prescribed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 11 apply to all filings in Board inter partes proceedings); NSM Resources Corp. v. Microsoft Corp., 113 USPQ2d 1029, 1037-38 (TTAB 2014) (applying Rule 11 sanctions to dismiss a Board proceeding "initiated in bad faith" finding petitioner’s pleading "frivolous," and its conduct "vexatious"). See also Central Manufacturing, Inc. v. Third Millennium Technology Inc., 61 USPQ2d 1210, 1213 (TTAB 2001) (the Board will also consider the conduct of a party relating to requests to extend time to oppose).