Seventy-Three Patent Practitioners, Comment Letter on Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees During Fiscal Year 2020, 84 Fed. Reg. 37398 (Jul. 31, 2019)
81 Pages Posted: 24 Feb 2020 Last revised: 2 Mar 2020
Date Written: September 27, 2019
In September 2019, seventy-three patent practitioners cooperatively authored a comment letter on the Patent and Trademark Office's fee-setting proposal of July 2019. We are deeply troubled by several aspects of this proposal:
• The PTO is an executive branch agency, not a private-sector company. The PTO is subject to many laws that are not recognized in the proposal. Various elements of this proposal violate laws that are not discussed.
• There are a number of plain errors in the factual statements and rationale for the DOCX proposal, the annual practitioner fee proposal, and several of the “Rulemaking Considerations” sections.
• The costs of several of the proposed rules are substantial; yet the only discussion is “The Office did not identify any monetized costs and benefits of the proposed rule, but found that the proposed rule has … no identified costs.” This sentence implies more about the quality of the Office’s analysis than it does about the merits of the proposed rules. This letter identifies dozens of costs that were not accounted for as required by various statutes.
Keywords: patent law, Patent and Trademark Office, administrative law, Independed Offices Appropriations Act, OMB Circular A-25Administrative Procedure Act, Regulatory Flexibility Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, Information Collection regulations, Information Quality Act, Executive Order 12866, OMB Circular A-4
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation