[E-trademarks] Petition for Certiorari - Chestek PLLC v. Vidal

[Sam Castree]

Dear Pam,

What kind of deadline is there for such a petition?  I'm on the Illinois
State Bar Association's IP section council, but our next meeting isn't
until about a month from now.  And after that, I'm not sure how long it
would take to put something together (assuming that the troops can be
rallied at all).

Cheers,

Sam Castree, III

*Sam Castree Law, LLC*
*3421 W. Elm St.*
*McHenry, IL 60050*
*(815) 344-6300*



On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 3:47 PM Pamela Chestek via E-trademarks <
e-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Hope you're having a great Friday afternoon!
>
> This is to let you know that on Monday we will be filing a petition for
> certiorari in my loss in the Federal Circuit in In re Chestek PLLC. This
> step is being taken with great thought.
>
> The PTO is obliged by statute to follow the same processes described in
> the Administrative Procedures Act that all government agencies follow,
> which is to publish proposed rules for notice and comment and then consider
> the comments when propounding any final rule. In a broadly sweeping
> opinion, the Federal Circuit did *not* say that the proper steps were
> followed in the rulemaking for the domicile address requirement but instead
> skirted it by saying, essentially, that the PTO doesn't ever have to comply
> with that statutory requirement and therefore can propound any rule that it
> wants, for both patents and trademarks, without any obligation to do any
> formal rulemaking at all. Any advance warning or consultation with the
> stakeholders about new rules may be a thing of the past.
>
> The implications of this for both trademark and patent practitioners is
> profound. This case is also the only opportunity to force the PTO to
> reverse course. If not challenged, the decision stands and the next person
> challenging any egregious rulemaking will have to overcome this
> appeals-level precedent.
>
> I am hoping that those of you who represent clients or organizations who
> might be adversely affected by an unfettered PTO will consider filing a
> petition in support of the Supreme Court's grant of certiorari. This is
> when I need the most support - we need to convince the Supreme Court that
> this case must be heard. This is actually more important than briefs once
> cert has been granted. If you'd like a copy of the petition being filed,
> write to me privately and I'll be happy to send you a copy.
>
> We have asked AIPLA and INTA to support the petition for cert but they
> haven't committed yet. If you have any influence with those organizations,
> please encourage them to file a petition in support. I would also ask
> anyone who is a member of IPO to ask them to consider supporting the
> petition.
>
> Thanks so much for your past support - I have had many private comments
> thanking me and appreciate them all. And please help me with this one last
> step.
>
> Pam
>
> Pamela S. Chestek
> Chestek Legal
> 300 Fayetteville St.
> Unit 2492
> Raleigh, NC 27602
> +1 919-800-8033
> pamela at chesteklegal.com
> www.chesteklegal.com
>
>
>
> --
> E-trademarks mailing list
> E-trademarks at oppedahl-lists.com
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/e-trademarks_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240510/5d57a69f/attachment.htm>