TMEP 611.02(a): TEAS Checkoff Boxes

This is the October 2015 Edition of the TMEP

Previous: §611.02 | Next: §611.03

611.02(a)    TEAS Checkoff Boxes

On some of the TEAS forms, the person signing the response must confirm that he or she is authorized to sign the document by clicking one of three buttons indicating that he or she is: (1) an unrepresented applicant or registrant who has not previously been represented in this matter, or was previously represented by a qualified practitioner who has withdrawn or whose power has been revoked; (2) an attorney who is a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a state in the United States, and that if the applicant or registrant was previously represented by a different qualified practitioner, the previous power has been revoked, or the previously appointed practitioner has withdrawn; or (3) an authorized Canadian attorney or agent who has been granted recognition by OED, and if the applicant or registrant was previously represented by a different qualified practitioner, the previous power has been revoked, or the previously appointed practitioner has withdrawn. The USPTO will accept these statements unless there is conflicting information in the record or the USPTO is otherwise made aware of conflicting information.

Example: If an attorney lists a foreign address and checks the box indicating that he or she is a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a state in the United States, the USPTO will accept this statement, as long as there is no conflicting information in the record.

Example: If an attorney indicates that the applicant was previously unrepresented, or that the applicant was previously represented by another attorney who has withdrawn or whose power has been revoked, when, in fact, there is another attorney of record whose power has not been revoked, the USPTO must inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Example: If the signatory identifies himself or herself as an “attorney,” but does not check the box confirming that he or she is a member in good standing of the bar of the highest court of a state in the United States, the USPTO will inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Example: If the signatory checks the box indicating that he or she is a person with legal authority to bind a juristic applicant (e.g., a corporate officer or general partner of a partnership), but sets forth a title that the USPTO would not normally accept (e.g., accountant, paralegal, or trademark administrator), the USPTO will inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Example: If, instead of checking the “attorney in good standing” box, a United States attorney checks one of the other boxes (i.e., indicating that the applicant is not represented by an attorney, or that the attorney is an authorized Canadian, representing a Canadian applicant), an issue of signatory authority arises, and the USPTO will inquire into the signatory’s authority to sign, because there is inconsistent information in the record.

Exception: If the signatory indicates that he or she is a Canadian attorney or agent who has been granted recognition by OED, the USPTO staff must still check the OED list to verify this information. See TMEP §602.03(a) for further information about Canadian attorneys and agents.

See TMEP §§611.05(a) and 712.03 regarding issuance of a notice of incomplete response where there is a question as to a signatory’s authority to sign.