§11.801-§11.901    Maintaining the Integrity of the Profession

§11.801    Registration, recognition and disciplinary matters.

An applicant for registration or recognition to practice before the Office, or a practitioner in connection with an application for registration or recognition, or a practitioner in connection with a disciplinary or reinstatement matter, shall not:

  • (a) Knowingly make a false statement of material fact; or
  • (b) Fail to disclose a fact necessary to correct a misapprehension known by the person to have arisen in the matter, fail to cooperate with the Office of Enrollment and Discipline in an investigation of any matter before it, or knowingly fail to respond to a lawful demand or request for information from an admissions or disciplinary authority, except that the provisions of this section do not require disclosure of information otherwise protected by § 11.106.

[Added 78 FR 20180, April 3, 2013, effective May 3, 2013]

§11.802    Judicial and legal officials.

  • (a) A practitioner shall not make a statement that the practitioner knows to be false or with reckless disregard as to its truth or falsity concerning the qualifications or integrity of a judge, adjudicatory officer or public legal officer, or of a candidate for election or appointment to judicial or legal office.
  • (b) A practitioner who is a candidate for judicial office shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Code of Judicial Conduct.

[Added 78 FR 20180, April 3, 2013, effective May 3, 2013]

§11.803    Reporting professional misconduct.

  • (a) A practitioner who knows that another practitioner has committed a violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that practitioner’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a practitioner in other respects, shall inform the OED Director and any other appropriate professional authority.
  • (b) A practitioner who knows that a judge, hearing officer, administrative law judge, administrative patent judge, or administrative trademark judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the individual’s fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.
  • (c) The provisions of this section do not require disclosure of information otherwise protected by § 11.106 or information gained while participating in an approved lawyers assistance program.

[Added 78 FR 20180, April 3, 2013, effective May 3, 2013]

§11.804    Misconduct.

It is professional misconduct for a practitioner to:

  • (a) Violate or attempt to violate the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, knowingly assist or induce another to do so, or do so through the acts of another;
  • (b) Commit a criminal act that reflects adversely on the practitioner’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a practitioner in other respects;
  • (c) Engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation;
  • (d) Engage in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice;
  • (e) State or imply an ability to influence improperly a government agency or official or to achieve results by means that violate the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct or other law;
  • (f) Knowingly assist a judge, hearing officer, administrative law judge, administrative patent judge, administrative trademark judge, or judicial officer in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct or other law;
  • (g) Knowingly assist an officer or employee of the Office in conduct that is a violation of applicable rules of conduct or other law;
  • (h) Be publicly disciplined on ethical or professional misconduct grounds by any duly constituted authority of:
    • (1) A State,
    • (2) The United States, or
    • (3) The country in which the practitioner resides; or
  • (i) Engage in other conduct that adversely reflects on the practitioner’s fitness to practice before the Office.

[Added 78 FR 20180, April 3, 2013, effective May 3, 2013]

§§11.805-11.900    [Reserved]

§11.901    Savings clause.

  • (a) A disciplinary proceeding based on conduct engaged in prior to the effective date of these regulations may be instituted subsequent to such effective date, if such conduct would continue to justify disciplinary sanctions under the provisions of this part.
  • (b) No practitioner shall be subject to a disciplinary proceeding under this part based on conduct engaged in before the effective date hereof if such conduct would not have been subject to disciplinary action before such effective date.

[Added 78 FR 20180, April 3, 2013, effective May 3, 2013]