Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules 78159 

(vii) Neither ask for nor receive any 

fee or compensation of any kind for 

legal services from a clinic client on 

whose behalf service is rendered; 

(viii) Have proved to the satisfaction 

of the OED Director that he or she 

possesses the scientific and technical 

qualifications necessary for him or her 

to render patent applicants valuable 

service; and 

(ix) Comply with all additional 

criteria established by the OED Director. 

(3) In order to be granted limited 

recognition to practice before the Office 

in trademark matters under the USPTO 

Law School Clinic Certification 

Program, a law student must: 

(i) Be enrolled in a law school that is 

an active participant in the USPTO Law 

School Clinic Certification Program; 

(ii) Be enrolled in the trademark 

practice area of a clinic of the 

participating law school; 

(iii) Have successfully completed at 

least one year of law school or the 

equivalent; 

(iv) Have read the USPTO Rules of 

Professional Conduct and the relevant 

USPTO rules of practice and procedure 

for trademark matters; 

(v) Be supervised by an approved 

Faculty Clinic Supervisor pursuant to 

paragraph (c)(2) of this section; 

(vi) Be certified by the dean of the 

participating law school, or one 

authorized to act for the dean, as: having 

completed the first year of law school or 

the equivalent, being in compliance 

with the law school’s ethics code, and 

being of good moral character and 

reputation; 

(vii) Neither ask for nor receive any 

fee or compensation of any kind for 

legal services from a clinic client on 

whose behalf service is rendered; and 

(viii) Comply with all additional 

criteria established by the OED Director. 

(4) Students registered to practice 

before the Office in patent matters as a 

patent agent, or authorized to practice 

before the Office in trademark matters 

under § 11.14, must complete and 

submit a student application pursuant 

to paragraph (d)(1) of this section and 

meet the criteria of paragraph (d)(2) or 

(3) of this section, as applicable, in 

order to participate in the program. 

■ 4. Add § 11.17 to read as follows: 

§ 11.17 Requirements for participation in 

the USPTO Law School Clinic Certification 

Program. 

(a) Each law school participating in 

the USPTO Law School Clinic 

Certification Program must provide its 

patent and/or trademark services on a 

pro bono basis for clients that qualify for 

assistance from the law school’s clinic. 

(b) Each law school participating in 

the USPTO Law School Clinic 

Certification Program shall, on a 

quarterly basis, provide the Office of 

Enrollment and Discipline with a report 

regarding its clinic activity, which shall 

include: 

(1) The number of law students 

participating in each of the patent and 

trademark practice areas of the school’s 

clinic in the preceding quarter; 

(2) The number of faculty 

participating in each of the patent and 

trademark practice areas of the school’s 

clinic in the preceding quarter; 

(3) The number of consultations 

provided to persons who requested 

assistance from the law school clinic in 

the preceding quarter; 

(4) The number of client 

representations undertaken for each of 

the patent and trademark practice areas 

of the school’s clinic in the preceding 

quarter; 

(5) The identity and number of 

applications and responses filed in each 

of the patent and/or trademark practice 

areas of the school’s clinic in the 

preceding quarter; 

(6) The number of patents issued, or 

trademarks registered, to clients of the 

clinic in the preceding quarter; and 

(7) All other information specified by 

the OED Director. 

(c) Inactivation of law schools 

participating in the USPTO Law School 

Certification Program. 

(1) The OED Director may inactivate 

a patent and/or trademark practice area 

of a participating law school: 

(i) If the participating law school does 

not have an approved Faculty Clinic 

Supervisor for the relevant practice area, 

as described in § 11.16(c); 

(ii) If the participating law school 

does not meet each of the requirements 

and criteria for participation in the 

USPTO Law School Clinic Certification 

Program as set forth in § 11.16, this 

section, or as otherwise established by 

the OED Director; or 

(iii) For other good cause as 

determined by the OED Director. 

(2) In the event that a practice area of 

a participating school is inactivated, the 

participating law school students must: 

(i) Immediately cease all student 

practice before the Office in the relevant 

practice area and notify each client of 

such; and 

(ii) Disassociate themselves from all 

client matters relating to practice before 

the Office in the relevant practice area, 

including complying with Office and 

State rules for withdrawal from 

representation. 

(3) A patent or trademark practice 

area of a law school clinic that has been 

inactivated may be restored to active 

status, upon application to and approval 

by the OED Director. 

(d) Removal of law schools 

participating in the USPTO Law School 

Clinic Certification Program. (1) The 

OED Director may remove a patent and/ 

or trademark practice area of the clinic 

of a law school participating in the 

USPTO Law School Clinic Certification 

Program: 

(i) Upon request from the law school; 

(ii) If the participating law school 

does not meet each of the requirements 

and criteria for participation in the 

USPTO Law School Clinic Certification 

Program as set forth in § 11.16, this 

section, or as otherwise established by 

the OED Director; or 

(iii) For other good cause as 

determined by the OED Director. 

(2) In the event that a practice area of 

a participating school is removed by the 

OED Director, the participating law 

school students must: 

(i) Immediately cease all student 

practice before the Office in the relevant 

practice area and notify the client of 

such; and 

(ii) Disassociate themselves from all 

client matters relating to practice before 

the Office in the relevant practice area, 

including complying with Office and 

State rules for withdrawal from 

representation. 

(3) A school that has been removed 

from participation in the USPTO Law 

School Clinic Certification Program 

under this section may reapply to the 

program in compliance with § 11.16. 

Dated: December 8, 2015. 

Michelle K. Lee, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2015–31627 Filed 12–15–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2015–0196; FRL–9940–11– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Minnesota and 

Michigan; Revision to Taconite Federal 

Implementation Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of 

public comment period. 

SUMMARY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is reopening the public 

comment period for a proposed rule 

published October 22, 2015. On 

November 23, 2015, EPA received a 

request from the National Tribal Air 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
78160 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 241 / Wednesday, December 16, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

Association to extend the public 

comment period an additional 120 days 

from the closing date of November 23, 

2015 and from the Fond du Lac Band of 

Lake Superior Chippewa for an 

unspecified period of time. EPA is, 

therefore, reopening the comment 

period for an additional 30 days after 

November 23, 2015. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published on October 22, 

2015 (80 FR 64160), is reopened. 

Comments must be received on or 

before December 23, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2015–0196, to: Douglas Aburano, 

Chief, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 353–6960, aburano.douglas@

epa.gov. Additional instructions on how 

to comment can be found in the notice 

of proposed rulemaking published 

October 22, 2015 (80 FR 64160). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental 

Engineer, Attainment Planning & 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6052, 

rosenthal.steven@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

October 22, 2015, EPA proposed 

revisions to a Federal implementation 

plan (FIP) addressing the requirement 

for best available retrofit technology 

(BART) for taconite plants in Minnesota 

and Michigan. In response to petitions 

for reconsideration, we proposed to 

revise the nitrogen oxides (NOX) limits 

for taconite furnaces at facilities owned 

and operated by Cliffs Natural 

Resources (Cliffs) and ArcelorMittal 

USA LLC (ArcelorMittal). We also 

proposed to revise the sulfur dioxide 

(SO2) requirements at two of Cliffs’ 

facilities. We proposed these changes 

because new information had come to 

light that was not available when we 

originally promulgated the FIP on 

February 6, 2013. 

Dated: December 4, 2015. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2015–31523 Filed 12–15–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS 

COMMISSION 

47 CFR Part 12 

[PS Docket No. 14–174; Report No. 3034] 

Petition for Reconsideration of Action 

in a Rulemaking Proceeding 

AGENCY: Federal Communications 

Commission. 

ACTION: Petition for reconsideration. 

SUMMARY: In this document, a Petition 

for Reconsideration (Petition) has been 

filed in the Commission’s Rulemaking 

Proceeding by David C. Bergmann, on 

behalf of the National Association of 

State Utility Consumer Advocates. 

DATES: Oppositions to the Petition must 

be filed on or before December 31, 2015. 

Replies to an opposition must be filed 

on or before January 11, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications 

Commission, 445 12th Street SW., 

Washington DC 20554. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Linda Pintro, Public Safety and 

Homeland Security Bureau, 202–418– 

7490, linda.pintro@fcc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a 

summary of Commission’s document, 

Report No. 3034, released December 2, 

2015. The full text of Report No. 3034 

is available for viewing and copying at 

the FCC Reference Information Center, 

445 12th Street SW., Room CY–A257 

Washington, DC 20554, or may be 

accessed online via the Commission’s 

Electronic Comment Filing System at 

http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/. The 

Commission will not send a copy of the 

document pursuant to the Congressional 

Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A), 

because this document does not have an 

impact on any rules of particular 

applicability. 

Subject: Ensuring Continuity of 911 

Communications Report and Order, 

published at 80 FR 62470, October 16, 

2015, in PS Docket No. 14–174. This 

document is published pursuant to 47 

CFR 1.429(e). See also 47 CFR 1.4(b)(1). 

Number of Petitions Filed: 1 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Gloria J. Miles, 

Federal Register Liaison Officer, Office of the 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2015–31574 Filed 12–15–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712–01–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS