January 07, 2016
Authored and Edited by Adriana L. Burgy; Stephanie M. Sanders
For applications having an actual filing date on or after September 16, 2012, a party applying for a patent has the option of naming the inventor or joint inventors of the invention as the applicant or naming the assignee, an obligated assignee, or a person who otherwise shows sufficient proprietary interest in the application as the applicant. To File or Not to File as an Applicant-Assignee: That is the Question, a post on the Finnegan AIA Blog, provides insight into the strategy behind determining which entity to list as the applicant.
The identity of the applicant has implications on a number of actions and procedures that will occur during prosecution. For example, 37 CFR § 1.32, which applies to applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, notes that “A power of attorney must: . . . (4) Be signed by the applicant for patent (§ 1.42) or the patent owner . . . ” As such, the party named as the applicant when an application is filed is the party who must sign a Power of Attorney. If the applicant changes during prosecution, then a new Power of Attorney must be executed and filed with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for the appointed practitioners to remain of record.
The following flow-chart is useful in determining the party that can effectively sign a Power of Attorney based on when the application was filed and which entity was named as the applicant.
You can access Patents Forms on the USPTO website here.
Copyright © 2016 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
At the PTAB Blog
Discretion All the Way Down: USPTO Uses a Discretionary IPR Denial to Justify a
§ 325(d) EPR Denial
May 28, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
IPR and PGR Statistics for Final Written Decisions Issued in March and April 2026
May 26, 2026
At the PTAB Blog
May 20, 2026
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.