C.F.R. » Title 37 » CHAPTER I—UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 11—REPRESENTATION OF OTHERS BEFORE THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE › Subpart D—USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct

37 C.F.R. § 11.107

Conflict of interest; Current clients

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

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, a practitioner shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest. A concurrent conflict of interest exists if:

(1) The representation of one client will be directly adverse to another client; or

(2) There is a significant risk that the representation of one or more clients will be materially limited by the practitioner's responsibilities to another client, a former client or a third person or by a personal interest of the practitioner.

(b) Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of interest under paragraph (a) of this section, a practitioner may represent a client if:

(1) The practitioner reasonably believes that the practitioner will be able to provide competent and diligent representation to each affected client;

(2) The representation is not prohibited by law;

(3) The representation does not involve the assertion of a claim by one client against another client represented by the practitioner in the same litigation or other proceeding before a tribunal; and

(4) Each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2015–2019 · leading case: Maling v. Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, 42 N.E.3d 199 (Mass. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Maling v. Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, 42 N.E.3d 199 (Mass. 2015). “The current regulation on concurrent conflicts of interest, 37 C.F.R. § 11.107 (2013), is virtually identical in language to Mass.”
Dr. Falk Pharma Gmbh v. Generico, LLC, 916 F.3d 975 (Fed. Cir. 2019). “…in Dr. Falk , the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is the relevant forum and it has also adopted the Model Rules. 37 C.F.R. § 11.107 (a).”
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.