1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Visa Restrictions Limit Authorization To Practice Before Patent And Trademark Office

Visa Restrictions Limit Authorization To Practice Before Patent And Trademark Office

Client Alert | 1 min read | 02.21.06

There is no abuse of discretion in a Patent and Trademark Office denial of full registration to practice before the PTO to a nonimmigrant foreign individual, as full registration would have authorized that individual to do work in which she could not lawfully engage and would have been inconsistent with the terms of her visa, a Federal Circuit panel concludes in Catherine Lacavera v. Jon W. Dudas (No. 05-1204; February 6, 2006).

Lacavera, a Canadian citizen and nonimmigrant alien, began working in the United States as an attorney pursuant to a one year visa which permitted her only to prepare and prosecute patent applications at a New York law firm. Lacavera then successfully passed the patent bar examination but, because of legal restrictions imposed by her visa, was granted only limited recognition to practice before the PTO. Lacavera then challenged the PTO's decision to deny her full registration, initially before the PTO General Counsel and subsequently by filing suit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under the Administrative Procedure Act. Following denial of Lacavera's motion for summary judgment and grant of summary judgment in favor of the PTO, Lacavera appeals.

The CAFC panel affirms. 35 U.S.C. § 2(b)(2), the statute providing the PTO with authority to govern the conduct of proceedings before it and to govern the recognition and conduct of attorneys, is silent as to whether the PTO may consider visa restrictions in determining whether or not to grant recognition. However, the statute states that the PTO may require applicants to show that they are “possessed of the necessary qualifications to render to applicants” valuable service. It was reasonable for the PTO to enact regulations that limit an alien's ability to practice before it to those activities in which the alien may lawfully engage, and the PTO did not exceed its statutory authority in promulgating the regulations in question.

Insights

Client Alert | 6 min read | 03.26.24

California Office of Health Care Affordability Notice Requirement for Material Change Transactions Closing on or After April 1, 2024

Starting next week, on April 1st, health care entities in California closing “material change transactions” will be required to notify California’s new Office of Health Care Affordability (“OHCA”) and potentially undergo an extensive review process prior to closing. The new review process will impact a broad range of providers, payers, delivery systems, and pharmacy benefit managers with either a current California footprint or a plan to expand into the California market. While health care service plans in California are already subject to an extensive transaction approval process by the Department of Managed Health Care, other health care entities in California have not been required to file notices of transactions historically, and so the notice requirement will have a significant impact on how health care entities need to structure and close deals in California, and the timing on which closing is permitted to occur....