I waited months to see if this was going to come out on its own. And it's apparent that it was going to remain buried for as long as it could remain buried.
Below is a citation from the law that is referenced in the document PDF file at the end of this post. That document is dated April 11, 2017.
I'm just going to drop this here and you can make your own informed decision.
Quote:
37 CFR 11.804 - Misconduct
ยง 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.
Now read this:http://dkusa.com/PDF/oops.pdf
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
