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 | 7 min read | 10.29.26

7th EU Competition Law Conference, co-hosted by Crowell & Moring, King’s College London and the Competition Law Center at George Washington University

On 8 October 2026, Crowell & Moring, King's College London, and the Competition Law Center at George Washington University co-hosted the 7th EU Competition Law Conference at De Warande in Brussels. Mark Meador, Commissioner at the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC), delivered the opening keynote address, followed by four panels bringing together practitioners, regulators, academics, and in-house counsel to discuss the latest developments in EU, UK, and US competition law enforcement. Among other things, the panels examined algorithmic pricing; the European Commission's (Commission) new guidelines on exclusionary abuses under Article 102 TFEU (Article 102 Guidelines); the impact of dominant positions in merger reviews; and lessons from the enforcement of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the UK’s Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. ...