A.C. Entis-IP maintains ongoing relationships with non-US patent firms, serving as their US associate for filing and prosecuting patent applications with the USPTO, for example US national stage applications under 35 USC §371. Below, we answer frequently asked questions (FAQs) regarding our US practice.
A: Yes. US Patent Rules impose no restriction on the geographic location of a registered practitioner, provided that the practitioner is a US Citizen and registered to practice before the USPTO. See, for example, 37 CFR §1.31, §1.32, §11.6, and §11.10.
Drs. Allan Entis (Reg. No. 52,866) and Kenichi Hartman (Reg. No. 68,766) are registered to practice before the USPTO and have US citizenship.
A: Yes. A.C. Entis-IP has an experienced paralegal team with a decade of experience filing papers directly with the USPTO. A.C. Entis-IP does not have to rely on US-based practitioners at any phase of patent prosecution, from initial filing of the application, through responding to Office Action, and onto allowance, issuance, and post-issuance proceedings including inter partes review.
A.C. Entis-IP also receives immediate e-mail notification of all new official correspondence from the USPTO for every application for which the firm has Power of Attorney and which is filed using the firm’s USPTO-designated customer number. Paper documents, such as issued patents, are sent directly to our Tel Aviv office.
A.C. Entis-IP also receives immediate e-mail notification of all new official correspondence from the USPTO for every application for which the firm has Power of Attorney and which is filed using the firm’s USPTO-designated customer number. Paper documents, such as issued patents, are sent directly to our Tel Aviv office.
A: Yes. In modern USPTO practice, many Examiners work from home offices. As such, in-person interviews have become increasingly rare. The default practice for Examiner interviews is to conduct the interview over the phone, and in some cases over video conference. We conduct telephonic Examiner interviews for clients on a regular basis. We have found that interviews greatly enhanced the ability of the Examiner and the applicant to reach a “meeting of the minds”, and to speed up progress of examination towards allowances.
A: Yes. In re Queen’s University at Kingston, No. 2015-145 (Fed. Cir. March 7, 2016), the Federal Circuit acknowledged a patent-agent privilege covering client communications with non-attorney patent agents in the course of agents’ authorized practice before the USPTO.
A: Since 2009, A.C. Entis-IP has filed hundreds of patent applications directly in the USPTO for its clients. A partial selection of issued US patents drafted and/or prosecuted by A.C. Entis-IP can be seen by clicking here.