C.F.R. » Title 37 » CHAPTER I—UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 42—TRIAL PRACTICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD › Subpart A—Trial Practice and Procedure

37 C.F.R. § 42.52

Compelling testimony and production

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

(a) Authorization required. A party seeking to compel testimony or production of documents or things must file a motion for authorization. The motion must describe the general relevance of the testimony, document, or thing, and must:

(1) In the case of testimony, identify the witness by name or title; and

(2) In the case of a document or thing, the general nature of the document or thing.

(b) Outside the United States. For testimony or production sought outside the United States, the motion must also:

(1) In the case of testimony. (i) Identify the foreign country and explain why the party believes the witness can be compelled to testify in the foreign country, including a description of the procedures that will be used to compel the testimony in the foreign country and an estimate of the time it is expected to take to obtain the testimony; and

(ii) Demonstrate that the party has made reasonable efforts to secure the agreement of the witness to testify in the United States but has been unsuccessful in obtaining the agreement, even though the party has offered to pay the travel expenses of the witness to testify in the United States.

(2) In the case of production of a document or thing. (i) Identify the foreign country and explain why the party believes production of the document or thing can be compelled in the foreign country, including a description of the procedures that will be used to compel production of the document or thing in the foreign country and an estimate of the time it is expected to take to obtain production of the document or thing; and

(ii) Demonstrate that the party has made reasonable efforts to obtain the agreement of the individual or entity having possession, custody, or control of the document or thing to produce the document or thing in the United States but has been unsuccessful in obtaining that agreement, even though the party has offered to pay the expenses of producing the document or thing in the United States.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2013–2020 · leading case: Abbott Laboratories v. Cordis Corporation
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Abbott Labs. v. Cordis Corp., 710 F.3d 1318 (Fed. Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.52 -.53 (2013); see also Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed.”
Sec. People, Inc. v. Iancu, 971 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2020). “”); see also 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.52 (governing the compulsion of testimony by the Board), 42.”
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.