Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
At present, when a patent applicant files a Request for Continued Examination (“RCE”) during U.S. patent prosecution, the applicant can expect further action from the examiner within about the same amount of time it takes to receive a follow-up action to a regular, non-final office action, typically a few months. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) recently announced that it would implement internal changes to RCE docketing on Nov. 15, 2009, and will implement internal changes to the examiner count system by early 2010. These changes may significantly delay further examination of an application in which a RCE is filed, and consequently the ultimate issuance of a patent. To mitigate the effects of these changes, patent applicants may need to alter patent prosecution strategies going forward.
Change in RCE Docketing
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.