Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[comodonejp]

My theory is that the practitioner is presumed authorized to represent the particular party "When a patent practitioner acting in a representative capacity", even without POA on file according to 1.34. Assignment is separate factual issue. So, once the case is assigned, the practitioner can still prosecute the case as a patent practitioner acting in representative capacity even without POA.
So once Inventor's POA is filed, the practitioner carry-on the case even after the assignment is executed unless the assignee revoke the practitioner's representation. Until then or obtain POA from the assignee, the practitioner is acting in a representative capacity, which is no problem from USPTO side.
If in fact, the assignee didn't authorize the inventor's attorney to act on his/her behalf, the assignee needs to appoint different practitioner. Until then, the practitioner will carry on the case and may not be to abandone the responsibility because of ethical rule.  Is my point clear now?