37 C.F.R. § 1.66

Statements under oath

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

An oath or affirmation may be made before any person within the United States authorized by law to administer oaths. An oath made in a foreign country may be made before any diplomatic or consular officer of the United States authorized to administer oaths, or before any officer having an official seal and authorized to administer oaths in the foreign country in which the applicant may be, whose authority shall be proved by a certificate of a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States, or by an apostille of an official designated by a foreign country which, by treaty or convention, accords like effect to apostilles of designated officials in the United States. The oath shall be attested in all cases in this and other countries, by the proper official seal of the officer before whom the oath or affirmation is made. Such oath or affirmation shall be valid as to execution if it complies with the laws of the State or country where made. When the person before whom the oath or affirmation is made in this country is not provided with a seal, his official character shall be established by competent evidence, as by a certificate from a clerk of a court of record or other proper officer having a seal.

[77 FR 48819, Aug. 14, 2012]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 1981–2007 · leading case: In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413 (C.C.P.A. 1981).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In re Keller, 642 F.2d 413 (C.C.P.A. 1981). “This statement, therefore, (1) must be subscribed to by the applicant, and (2) must either (a) be sworn to or affirmed by the applicant as provided in 37 CFR 1.66, or (b) include the personal declaration of the applicant as prescribed in 37 CFR 1.”

Aristocrat Tech. Australia PTY Ltd. v. Int'l Game Tech. & IGT, 491 F. Supp. 2d 916 (N.D. Cal. 2007). “) The notice stated, among other things: On March 21 2000, the United States Designated /Elected Office (DO/EO/US) mailed a Notification of Missing Requirements (Form PCT/DO/EO905) and Notification of a Defective Oath or Declaration (Form PCT/DO/EO/917) indicating that the…”

Imx, Inc. v. Lendingtree, LLC, 469 F. Supp. 2d 194 (D. Del. 2007). “systems named therein, are material to patentability as prescribed by 37 C.F.R. § 1.66 (b)(2)(H). 30. Additionally, defendant has not made out a prima facie case of unpatenta-bility under 37' C.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.