Source: https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s509.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 19:32:40+00:00

Document:
37 CFR 1.22 Fees payable in advance.
37 CFR 1.23 Method of payment.
(a) All payments of money required for United States Patent and Trademark Office fees, including fees for the processing of international applications (§ 1.445), shall be made in U.S. dollars and in the form of a cashier’s or certified check, Treasury note, national bank notes, or United States Postal Service money order. If sent in any other form, the Office may delay or cancel the credit until collection is made. Checks and money orders must be made payable to the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. (Checks made payable to the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks will continue to be accepted.) Payments from foreign countries must be payable and immediately negotiable in the United States for the full amount of the fee required. Money sent to the Office by mail will be at the risk of the sender, and letters containing money should be registered with the United States Postal Service.
37 CFR 1.22(b) sets forth that fees must be itemized in such a manner that it is clear for which purpose fees are paid. The Office may return fees that are not itemized. The intent of the fee itemization requirement is to encourage a better explanation by applicants of how fees being paid are to be applied by the Office. This will allow Office employees to properly account for the fees being paid by applicants. It should be noted that the language of 37 CFR 1.22 is not intended to create a problem when it is clear what fee is needed. A reference to “filing fee(s)” would be sufficient to cover filing fees (including search and examination fees) of all different types of applications and all types of claims. Further, in a paper submitted on a date later than the actual filing date, the reference to “filing fee(s)” would also be sufficient to cover the surcharge under 37 CFR 1.16, as the surcharge is also required to make the application complete. A reference to “any corresponding fee under 37 CFR 1.16” would be sufficient to cover any fee (e.g., surcharge, application size fee, excess claims fees) under 37 CFR 1.16. In a petition for an extension of time filed without a specifically itemized fee, but with a general authorization to charge a deposit account, it is clear that a fee for an extension of time is needed and the deposit account should be charged the appropriate extension of time fee.
Any payment of a patent process or trademark process fee by credit card must be in writing (see 37 CFR 1.2), and preferably submitted via the appropriate Office electronic filing system, or if filed in paper, on the Credit Card Payment Form (PTO-2038). If a Credit Card Payment Form or other document authorizing the Office to charge a patent process or trademark process fee to a credit card does not contain the information necessary to charge the fee to the credit card, the customer must submit a revised Credit Card Payment Form or document containing the necessary information. Office employees will not accept oral (telephonic) instructions to complete the Credit Card Payment Form or otherwise charge a patent process or trademark process fee (as opposed to information product or service fees) to a credit card.
37 CFR 1.25 Deposit accounts.
(a) For the convenience of attorneys, and the general public in paying any fees due, in ordering services offered by the Office, copies of records, etc., deposit accounts may be established in the Patent and Trademark Office upon payment of the fee for establishing a deposit account § 1.21(b)(1). A minimum deposit of $1,000 is required for paying any fee due or in ordering any services offered by the Office. However, a minimum deposit of $300 may be paid to establish a restricted subscription deposit account used exclusively for subscription order of patent copies as issued. At the end of each month, a deposit account statement will be rendered. A remittance must be made promptly upon receipt of the statement to cover the value of items or services charged to the account and thus restore the account to its established normal deposit value. An amount sufficient to cover all fees, services, copies, etc., requested must always be on deposit. Charges to accounts with insufficient funds will not be accepted. A service charge (§ 1.21(b)(2)) will be assessed for each month that the balance at the end of the month is below $1,000. For restricted subscription deposit accounts, a service charge (§ 1.21(b)(3)) will be assessed for each month that the balance at the end of the month is below $300.
(b) Filing, issue, appeal, international-type search report, international application processing, international design application fees, petition, and post-issuance fees may be charged against these accounts if sufficient funds are on deposit to cover such fees. A general authorization to charge all fees, or only certain fees, set forth in §§ 1.16 through 1.18 to a deposit account containing sufficient funds may be filed in an individual application, either for the entire pendency of the application or with a particular paper filed. A general authorization to charge fees in an international design application set forth in § 1.1031 will only be effective for the transmittal fee (§ 1.1031(a)). An authorization to charge fees under § 1.16 in an international application entering the national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371 will be treated as an authorization to charge fees under § 1.492. An authorization to charge fees set forth in § 1.18 to a deposit account is subject to the provisions of § 1.311(b). An authorization to charge to a deposit account the fee for a request for reexamination pursuant to § 1.510 or 1.913 and any other fees required in a reexamination proceeding in a patent may also be filed with the request for reexamination, and an authorization to charge to a deposit account the fee for a request for supplemental examination pursuant to § 1.610 and any other fees required in a supplemental examination proceeding in a patent may also be filed with the request for supplemental examination. An authorization to charge a fee to a deposit account will not be considered payment of the fee on the date the authorization to charge the fee is effective as to the particular fee to be charged unless sufficient funds are present in the account to cover the fee.
(2) A payment to replenish a deposit account may be submitted by electronic funds transfer over the Office’s Internet website (www.uspto.gov).
An overdrawn account will be immediately suspended and no charges will be accepted against it until a proper balance is restored, together with a payment of $10 (37 CFR 1.21(b)(1)) to cover the work done by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office incident to suspending and reinstating the account and dealing with charges which may have been made in the meantime.
If there is an authorization to charge the basic filing fee (37 CFR 1.16(a), (b), (c), (d), or (e)) to a deposit account which is overdrawn or has insufficient funds, a surcharge (37 CFR 1.16(f)) is required in addition to payment of the basic filing fee (37 CFR 1.16(a), (b), (c), (d), or (e)). For applications filed on or after July 1, 2005, which have been accorded a filing date under 37 CFR 1.53(b) or (d), if there is an authorization to charge any of the basic filing fee, the search fee, or the examination fee to a deposit account which is overdrawn or has insufficient funds, a surcharge under 37 CFR 1.16(f) is required in addition to payment of the required fee(s). Failure to timely pay the filing fee and surcharge will result in abandonment of the application.
Similarly, because of the burden placed on the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office incident to the operation of deposit accounts, a charge of $10 (37 CFR 1.21(b)(1)) will be made for opening each new account.
As provided in 37 CFR 1.311(b), an authorization to charge the issue fee (37 CFR 1.18) to a deposit account may be filed in an individual application only after the mailing of the notice of allowance. 37 CFR 1.25(b) also makes clear that a general authorization made prior to the mailing of a notice of allowance does not apply to issue fees under 37 CFR 1.18.
An authorization to charge fees relating only to a specific paper, could read “The Director is hereby authorized to charge any fees under 37 CFR 1.16 and 1.17 which may be required by this paper to Deposit Account No.________.” Such an authorization would cover situations in which a check to cover a filing and/or a processing fee under 37 CFR 1.16 and 1.17 was omitted or was for an amount less than the amount required. An authorization covering any omission or deficiency in a check or credit card payment applies to the processing fee under 37 CFR 1.21(m) in the event a check or credit card payment is refused or charged back by a financial institution, regardless of whether such deposit account authorization is limited to other fees (e.g., fees under 37 CFR 1.16 and 1.17). If a check or credit card payment for the issue fee is refused or charged back by a financial institution, the application may be held abandoned for failure to pay the issue fee within the statutory period for reply. See MPEP § 1306.
The Office will treat a deposit account authorization to charge "the filing fee" as an authorization to charge the following applicable fees under 37 CFR 1.16: basic filing fee; search fee; examination fee; any excess claims fees; any application size fee; and any non-electronic filing fee (see 37 CFR 1.16(t)). The Office will treat a deposit account authorization to charge "the basic filing fee" as an authorization to charge the following applicable fees under 37 CFR 1.16: basic filing fee; search fee; and examination fee. Any deposit account authorization to charge the filing fee but not the search fee or examination fee must specifically limit the authorization by reference to one or more paragraphs (a) - (e) of 37 CFR 1.16.
37 CFR 1.25(b) sets forth that fees in an international design application may be charged to a deposit account. A general authorization to charge fees in an international design application set forth in 37 CFR 1.1031 will only be effective for the transmittal fee (37 CFR 1.1031(a)). The international fees set forth in 37 CFR 1.1031, other than the transmittal fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.1031(a), are not required to be paid to the Office as an office of indirect filing. See 37 CFR 1.1031(d).
Under 35 U.S.C. 41(h)(1), fees charged under 35 U.S.C. 41(a), (b) and (d)(1) shall be reduced by 50 percent with respect to their application to any small business concern as defined under section 3 of the Small Business Act, and to any independent inventor or nonprofit organization as defined in regulations issued by the Director. Effective March 19, 2013, the availability of the small entity discount was extended to certain other fees not contained in 35 U.S.C. 41(a), (b) and (d)(1), but which are included among fees “for filing, searching, examining, issuing, appealing, and maintaining patent applications and patents” as authorized by Public Law 112-29, sec. 10(b), 125 Stat. 284 (September 16, 2011)(Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA)). Effective January 1, 2014, the small entity discount also becomes available to certain “filing, searching, [and] examining” fees for international applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). Note that if applicant qualifies as a small entity under 37 CFR 1.27, applicant may also qualify for “Micro Entity Status” under 35 U.S.C. 123. See 37 CFR 1.29 and MPEP § 509.04et seq. for the requirements to establish micro entity status for the purpose of paying micro entity fees.
The fees which are reduced by 50% for small entities include patent application filing fees including the basic filing fee, search fee, examination fee, application size fee, and excess claims fees (37 CFR 1.16), extension of time, revival, and appeal fees (37 CFR 1.17), patent issue fees (37 CFR 1.18), and maintenance fees on patents (37 CFR 1.20). Fees which are reduced by 50% effective March 19, 2013, but which were previously not reduced, include certain petition fees, 37 CFR 1.17(f)-(h), the request for reexamination fees, 37 CFR 1.20(c)(1), the fee for submitting an information disclosure statement in certain time frames, 37 CFR 1.17(p), the surcharge for reinstating an expired patent, 37 CFR 1.20(i), and the fee for an unintentionally delayed claim for priority, 37 CFR 1.17(t). Fees which are reduced by 50% effective January 1, 2014, but which were previously not reduced, are certain PCT international stage fees, including the transmittal fee (37 CFR 1.445(a)(1)(i)(B)), the search fee (37 CFR 1.445(a)(2)(ii)) and the preliminary examination fee (37 CFR 1.482(a)(1)(i)(B)).
Fees which are not reduced include document supply fees, 37 CFR 1.19, certificate of correction fees, 37 CFR 1.20(a), and miscellaneous fees and charges, 37 CFR 1.21. There is only one fee for which a small entity discount was offered prior to March 19, 2013 that is now ineligible for a small entity discount – the fee for a statutory disclaimer under 37 CFR 1.20(d).
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2005, provides that the filing fee charged under 35 U.S.C. 41(a)(1)(A) shall be reduced by 75 percent with respect to its application to any small entity "if the application is filed by electronic means as prescribed by the Director" (35 U.S.C. 41(h)(3)). Therefore, the filing fee for a nonprovisional original utility application filed on or after December 8, 2004 by a small entity in compliance with the Office electronic filing system is reduced by 75 percent. See 37 CFR 1.16(a)(1). The 75 percent reduction set forth in 35 U.S.C. 41(h)(3) does not apply to design applications, plant applications, reissue applications, or provisional applications.
35 U.S.C. 41(h)(1) gives the Director the authority to establish regulations defining independent inventors and nonprofit organizations. The Small Business Administration was given authority to establish the definition of a small business concern. A small entity for purposes of paying reduced fees is defined in 37 CFR 1.27(a) as a person, a small business concern, or a nonprofit organization. The term “person” rather than “independent inventor” is used since individuals who are not inventors but who have received some rights in the invention are intended to be covered by 37 CFR 1.27.
37 CFR 1.27 Definition of small entities and establishing status as a small entity to permit payment of small entity fees; when a determination of entitlement to small entity status and notification of loss of entitlement to small entity status are required; fraud on the Office.
37 CFR 1.27(a)(1) defines a person as any inventor or other individual (e.g., an individual to whom an inventor has transferred some rights in the invention), who has not assigned, granted, conveyed, or licensed, and is under no obligation under contract or law to assign, grant, convey, or license, any rights in the invention. An inventor or other individual who has transferred some rights, or is under an obligation to transfer some rights in the invention to one or more parties, can also qualify for small entity status if all the parties who have had rights in the invention transferred to them also qualify for small entity status either as a person, small business concern, or nonprofit organization.
(E) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association, or if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted preaccreditation status by such agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary for the granting of preaccreditation status, and the Secretary has determined that there is satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of such an agency or association within a reasonable time.
The definition of “university or other institution of higher education” as set forth herein essentially follows the definition of “institution of higher education” contained in 20 U.S.C. 1000. Institutions which are strictly research facilities, manufacturing facilities, service organizations, etc., are not intended to be included within the term “other institution of higher education” even though such institutions may perform an educational function or publish the results of their work.
Nonprofit organizations also include organizations of the type described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)) and which are exempt from taxation under 26 U.S.C. 501(a). Organizations described in 26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3) include corporations, and any community chest, fund, or foundation, organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition (but only if no part of its activities involve the provision of athletic facilities or equipment), or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual, no substantial part of the activities of which is carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting to influence legislation (limited exceptions may apply under 26 U.S.C. 501(h)) and which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.
Small entities may claim reduced fees regardless of the country in which they are located. There is no restriction requiring that the person, small business concern, or nonprofit organization be located in the United States. The same definitions apply to all applicants equally in accordance with the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property.
The “rights in the invention” under 37 CFR 1.27(a)(1), (a)(2)(i), and (a)(3)(i) are the rights in the United States. Rights in the invention include the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the United States or importing the invention into the United States. Therefore, for example, status as a small entity is lost by an inventor who has transferred or has an obligation to transfer a shop right to an employer who could not qualify as a small entity.
Individual inventors (37 CFR 1.27(a)(1)), small business concerns (37 CFR 1.27(a)(2)), and nonprofit organizations (37 CFR 1.27(a)(3)) can make an assignment, grant, conveyance, or license of partial rights in the invention to another individual(s), small business concern, or nonprofit organization who could qualify as a person (37 CFR 1.27(a)(1)), small business concern, or nonprofit organization. Under the circumstances described, the individual inventor, small business concern, or nonprofit organization could still qualify for small entity status. However, if the individual inventor, small business concern, or nonprofit organization assigned, granted, conveyed, or licensed, or came under an obligation to assign, grant, convey, or license, any rights to the invention to any individual, small business concern, or nonprofit organization which would not qualify as a small entity (37 CFR 1.27(a)), then the inventor, small business concern, or nonprofit organization would no longer qualify for small entity status.
With regard to transfer of rights in the invention, the rights in question are those in the United States to be covered by an application or patent. Transfer of rights to a Japanese patent, for example, would not affect small entity status if no rights in the United States to a corresponding patent were likewise transferred.
The payment of reduced fees under 35 U.S.C. 41 is limited to those situations in which all of the rights in the invention are owned by small entities, i.e., persons, small business concerns, or nonprofit organizations. To do otherwise would be clearly contrary to the intended purpose of the legislation which contains no indication that fees are to be reduced in circumstances where rights are owned by non-small entities. For example, a non-small entity is not permitted to transfer patent rights to a small business concern which would pay the reduced fees and grant a license to the entity.
If rights transferred to a non-small entity are later returned to a small entity so that all rights are held by small entities, reduced fees may be claimed.
The term “license” in the definitions includes nonexclusive as well as exclusive licenses and royalty free as well as royalty generating licenses. Implied licenses to use and resell patented articles purchased from a small entity, however, will not preclude the proper claiming of small entity status. Likewise, an order by an applicant to a firm to build a prototype machine or product for the applicant’s own use is not considered to constitute a license for purposes of the definitions. A grant of a non-exclusive license to a non-small entity will disqualify applicant from claiming small entity status. See Ulead Systems, Inc. v. Lex Computer & Management Corp., 351 F.3d 1139, 1142, 69 USPQ2d 1097, 1099 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
A security interest does not involve an obligation to transfer rights in the invention for the purposes of 37 CFR 1.27(a)(1) through (a)(3) unless the security interest is defaulted upon. See 37 CFR 1.27(a)(5). For example, an applicant or patentee may take out a loan from a large entity banking institution and the loan may be secured with rights in a patent application or patent of the applicant or patentee, respectively. The granting of such a security interest to the banking institution is not a currently enforceable obligation to assign, grant, convey, or license any rights in the invention to the banking institution. Only if the loan is defaulted upon will the security interest permit a transfer of rights in the application or patent to the banking institution. Thus, where the banking institution is a large entity, the applicant or patentee would not be prohibited from claiming small entity status merely because the banking institution has been granted a security interest, but if the loan is defaulted upon, there would be a loss of entitlement to small entity status. Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.27(g), notification of the loss of entitlement due to default on the terms of the security interest would need to be filed in the application or patent prior to paying, or at the time of paying, the earliest of the issue fee or any maintenance fee due after the date on which small entity status is no longer appropriate. See MPEP § 509.03, subsection VII. Removal of Status.
Also, although the Federal government agencies do not qualify as nonprofit organizations for paying reduced fees under the rules, a license to a Federal agency resulting from a funding agreement with the agency pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 202(c)(4) will not preclude the proper claiming of small entity status. Furthermore, a license to the Government resulting from a rights determination under Executive Order 10096 does not constitute a license so as to prohibit claiming small entity status by a person under 37 CFR 1.27(a)(1).
Public Law 96-517 added a new chapter 18 of Title 35 of the United States Code entitled “Patent Rights in Inventions Made With Federal Assistance.” Under the provisions of the statute, each funding agreement between a Federal agency and an individual, small business firm, or nonprofit organization must provide, inter alia, that “. . . the Federal agency shall have a nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice or have practiced for or on behalf of the United States any subject invention . . .” See 35 U.S.C. 202(c)(4). The Federal agencies do not qualify as nonprofit organizations for paying reduced patent fees under the rules. Applying this construction to the licensing of an invention to a Federal agency by a person, small business concern, or nonprofit organization pursuant to a funding agreement under 35 U.S.C. 202(c)(4) would preclude their qualifying for paying reduced fees. This, however, would frustrate the intent of Public Law 97-247 and Public Law 96-517 when taken together.
Government organizations as such, whether domestic or foreign, cannot qualify as nonprofit organizations as defined in 37 CFR 1.27(a)(3). Thus, for example, a government research facility or other government-owned corporation could not qualify. 37 CFR 1.27(a)(3) was based upon 35 U.S.C. 201(i), as established by Public Law 96-517. The limitation to “an organization of the type described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 501(c)(3)) and exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 501(a))” would by its nature exclude the U.S. government and its agencies and facilities, including research facilities and government corporations. State and foreign governments and governmental agencies and facilities would be similarly excluded. 37 CFR 1.27(a)(3) is not intended to include within the definition of a nonprofit organization government organizations of any kind located in any country. A university or other institution of higher education located in any country would qualify, however, as a “nonprofit organization” under 37 CFR 1.27(a)(3) even though it has some government affiliation since such institutions are specifically included.
A wholly owned subsidiary of a nonprofit organization or of a university is considered a part of the nonprofit organization or university and is not precluded from qualifying for small entity status.
(3) Assertion by payment of the small entity basic filing, basic transmittal, basic national fee, international search fee, or individual designation fee in an international design application. The payment, by any party, of the exact amount of one of the small entity basic filing fees set forth in § 1.16(a), (b), (c), (d), or (e), the small entity transmittal fee set forth in§ 1.445(a)(1), the small entity international search fee set forth in § 1.445(a)(2) to a Receiving Office other than the United States Receiving Office in the exact amount established for that Receiving Office pursuant toPCT Rule 16, or the small entity basic national fee set forth in § 1.492(a), will be treated as a written assertion of entitlement to small entity status even if the type of basic filing, basic transmittal, or basic national fee is inadvertently selected in error. The payment, by any party, of the small entity first part of the individual designation fee for the United States to the International Bureau (§ 1.1031) will be treated as a written assertion of entitlement to small entity status.
This application may qualify for “Small Entity Status” and, therefore, applicant may be entitled to the payment of reduced fees. In order to establish small entity status for the purpose of paying small entity fees, applicant must make a determination of entitlement to small entity status under 37 CFR 1.27(f) and make an assertion of entitlement to small entity status in the manner set forth in 37 CFR 1.27(c)(1) or 37 CFR 1.27(c)(3). Accordingly, if applicant meets the requirements of 37 CFR 1.27(a), applicant must submit a written assertion of entitlement to small entity status under 37 CFR 1.27(c) before fees can be paid in the small entity amount. See 37 CFR 1.27(d). The assertion must be signed, clearly identifiable, and convey the concept of entitlement to small entity status. See 37 CFR 1.27(c)(1). No particular form is required. If applicant qualifies as a small entity under 37 CFR 1.27, applicant may also qualify for “Micro Entity Status” under 35 U.S.C. 123. See 37 CFR 1.29 for the requirements to establish micro entity status for the purpose of paying micro entity fees.
(3) Assertion by payment of the small entity basic filing, basic transmittal, basic national fee, or international search fee, or individual designation fee in an international design application. The payment, by any party, of the exact amount of one of the small entity basic filing fees set forth in §§ 1.16(a), 1.16(b), 1.16(c), 1.16(d), 1.16(e), the small entity transmittal fee set forth in § 1.445(a)(1), the small entity international search fee set forth in § 1.445(a)(2) to a Receiving Office other than the United States Receiving Office in the exact amount established for that Receiving Office pursuant to PCT Rule 16, or the small entity basic national fee set forth in § 1.492(a), will be treated as a written assertion of entitlement to small entity status even if the type of basic filing, basic transmittal, or basic national fee is inadvertently selected in error. The payment, by any party, of the small entity first part of the individual designation fee for the United States to the International Bureau (§ 1.1031) will be treated as a written assertion of entitlement to small entity status.
For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, the written assertion of entitlement to small entity status can be signed by: (1) the applicant (37 CFR 1.42 or 1.421); (2) a patent practitioner of record or acting in a representative capacity under 37 CFR 1.34; (3) the inventor or a joint inventor, if the inventor is the applicant; or (4) the assignee. See 37 CFR 1.27(c)(2). The change to 37 CFR 1.27 for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, is for consistency with the change in practice concerning who is the applicant for patent in 37 CFR 1.42. The applicant as defined in 37 CFR 1.42 (or 37 CFR 1.421) can sign a written assertion of small entity status. Thus, the assignee, the person to whom the inventor is under an obligation to assign the invention, or the person who otherwise shows sufficient proprietary interest in the matter, who is applying for a patent under 37 CFR 1.46 can sign the written assertion of small entity status. In addition, if there are joint inventors who are the applicant, then one of the joint inventors can sign a written assertion of small entity status and thereby establish small entity status for the application (but see paragraph VI. below). The assignee can sign a written assertion of small entity status even if the assignee is not the applicant or is a juristic entity.
37 CFR 1.27 (pre-AIA) Definition of small entities and establishing status as a small entity to permit payment of small entity fees; when a determination of entitlement to small entity status and notification of loss of entitlement to small entity status are required; fraud on the Office.
Any inventor is permitted to submit a written assertion of small entity status, including individuals identified as inventors but who are not officially named of record as an executed oath or declaration under pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.63 has not yet been submitted. See pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.41(a)(1). Where an application is filed without an executed oath or declaration pursuant to pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.53(f), the Office will accept the written assertion of an individual who has merely been identified as an inventor on filing of the application (e.g., application transmittal letter) as opposed to having to be named as an inventor by the filing of an executed oath or declaration under pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.63 (pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.41(a)(1)). Pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.4(d)(4) and 37 CFR 11.18(b) are seen as sufficient basis to permit any individual to provide a written assertion so long as the individual identifies himself or herself as an inventor. An actual inventor who has not been identified as an inventor (e.g., by way of application transmittal letter) or named as an inventor (i.e., executed pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.63 oath or declaration) in the file record may not file a written assertion as to small entity entitlement.
The payment of an exact small entity basic filing (37 CFR 1.16(a), (b), (c), (d), or (e)), basic national fee (37 CFR 1.492(a)), or individual designation fee in an international design application (37 CFR 1.1031) is also considered to be a sufficient assertion of entitlement to small entity status. 37 CFR 1.27(c)(3). An applicant filing a patent application and paying an exact small entity basic filing, basic national fee, or individual designation fee automatically establishes small entity status for the application even without any other assertion of small entity status. This is so even if an applicant inadvertently selects the wrong type of small entity basic filing or basic national fee for the application being filed (e.g., the exact small entity basic filing fee for a design application is selected but the application is a utility application). If small entity status was not established when the basic filing or basic national fee was paid, such as by payment of a non-small entity basic filing, basic national fee, individual designation fee, a later claim to small entity status requires a written assertion under 37 CFR 1.27(c)(1). Payment of a small entity fee other than a small entity basic filing, basic national fee, or individual designation fee (e.g., extension of time fee, issue fee, or reexamination filing fee) without inclusion of a written assertion is not sufficient.
37 CFR 1.28 Refunds when small entity status is later established; how errors in small entity status are excused.
37 CFR 1.28(a) provides a three-month time period for requesting a refund of a portion of a non-small entity fee based on later establishment of small entity status. The start date of the three-month refund period of 37 CFR 1.28(a) is the date the full fee has been paid. See 37 CFR 1.28(b)(1). Payment by authorization to charge a deposit account is treated for refund purposes the same as payments by other means (e.g., check or credit card authorizations), with each being treated as paid (for refund purposes) on the date of receipt in the Office as defined by 37 CFR 1.6. Thus, the date of receipt of an authorization to charge fees starts the three-month period for refunds under 37 CFR 1.28(a), not the date of debit of the fee to a deposit account. If a payment is mailed with a Certificate of Mailing under 37 CFR 1.8, the three month period for requesting a refund will start on the actual date of receipt of the payment in the Office, and not the Certificate of Mailing date. If a payment is filed by Priority Mail Express® under 37 CFR 1.10, the date of deposit with the United States Postal Service (shown by the “date accepted” on the Priority Mail Express® mailing label or other official USPS notation) is the date of receipt of the payment by the Office under 37 CFR 1.10(a) and the three month period for requesting a refund starts on the date shown by the “date accepted” on the Priority Mail Express® mailing label rather than the date when the payment actually reaches the Office.
Under 37 CFR 1.28(c)(3), the failure to comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.28(c)(1) and (c)(2) permits the Office at its option to either charge a processing fee (37 CFR 1.17(i)) to process the paper or require compliance within a one-month non-extendable time period to avoid return of the paper.
Public Law 112-29, sec. 10(b), 125 Stat. 284 (September 16, 2011)( Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA)) adds 35 U.S.C. 123 to define a ‘‘micro entity.’’ March 19, 2013 is the date that the 75% micro entity discount first became available, because that is the date that fees “for filing, searching, examining, issuing, appealing, and maintaining patent applications and patents” were first set or adjusted by rulemaking under the Office’s fee setting authority. See Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees, 78 FR 4212 (January 18, 2013) which became effective in large part on March 19, 2013. January 1, 2014 is the rulemaking’s effective date for the micro entity discount as it applies to certain “filing, searching [and] examining” fees for international applications under the PCT.
35 U.S.C. 123(a) provides that the term ‘‘micro entity’’ means an applicant who makes a certification that the applicant: (1) qualifies as a small entity as defined in 37 CFR 1.27; (2) has not been named as an inventor on more than four previously filed patent applications, other than applications filed in another country, provisional applications under 35 U.S.C. 111(b), or international applications for which the basic national fee under 35 U.S.C. 41(a) was not paid; (3) did not, in the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which the applicable fee is being paid, have a gross income, as defined in section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 61(a)), exceeding three times the median household income for that preceding calendar year, as most recently reported by the Bureau of the Census; and (4) has not assigned, granted, or conveyed, and is not under an obligation by contract or law to assign, grant, or convey, a license or other ownership interest in the application concerned to an entity that, in the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which the applicable fee is being paid, had a gross income, as defined in section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, exceeding three times the median household income for that preceding calendar year, as most recently reported by the Bureau of the Census. 37 CFR 1.29(a)(1)-(4) implements the requirements under 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(1)-(4) for establishing micro entity status on the gross income basis.
The income level that is three times the median household income for the preceding calendar year, as most recently reported by the Bureau of the Census (i.e., the income threshold set forth in 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(3) and (a)(4)) is referred to as the “gross income limit” or the “maximum qualifying gross income.” The Office’s micro entity status certification form PTO/SB/15A refers to the official Web page address providing the up-to-date maximum qualifying gross income. Each inventor and each non-inventor applicant (e.g., an assignee-applicant) must individually meet the gross income limit. The gross income limit applies to the assignee (if any) regardless of whether the assignee is identified as the applicant. Under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4), the gross income limit applies to each party with an ownership interest in the application including any party(ies) to whom an ownership interest obligation is owed. Accordingly, each assignee, licensee, and inventor must individually meet the gross income limit.
35 U.S.C. 123(b) provides that an applicant is not considered to be named on a previously filed application for purposes of 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(2) if the applicant has assigned, or is under an obligation by contract or law to assign, all ownership rights in the previously filed application as the result of the applicant’s previous employment. 37 CFR 1.29(b) implements the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 123(b).
35 U.S.C. 123(c) provides that if an applicant’s or entity’s gross income in the preceding calendar year is not in United States dollars, the average currency exchange rate, as reported by the Internal Revenue Service, during that calendar year shall be used to determine whether the applicant’s or entity’s gross income exceeds the gross income limit specified in 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(3) or (4). 37 CFR 1.29(c) implements the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 123(c).
37 CFR 1.29 Micro entity status.
(4) Neither the applicant nor the inventor nor a joint inventor has assigned, granted, or conveyed, nor is under an obligation by contract or law to assign, grant, or convey, a license or other ownership interest in the application concerned to an entity that, in the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which the applicable fee is being paid, had a gross income, as defined in section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, exceeding three times the median household income for that preceding calendar year, as most recently reported by the Bureau of the Census.
37 CFR 1.29(a)(1)-(4) sets forth the requirements for establishing micro entity status on the gross income basis. If an application names more than one inventor, each inventor must meet the requirements of 37 CFR 1.29(a)(1)-(4) to file a micro entity certification on the gross income basis in the application. If the applicant is other than the inventor(s) (e.g., an assignee-applicant), then each such non-inventor applicant as well as each inventor must meet the requirements of 37 CFR 1.29(a)(1)-(4) to file a micro entity certification on the gross income basis in the application. If there is any assignee or licensee that received “ownership rights” from any inventor or non-inventor applicant, then the party(ies) with the “ownership interest” must also meet the gross income limit requirement.
Because each inventor and each non-inventor applicant (e.g., assignee-applicant) must separately meet the requirements under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(1)-(4), it would not be appropriate to file a micro entity certification under 37 CFR 1.29(a) for the application if there were more than one applicant or inventor and not all of the applicants and inventors qualified as micro entities under 35 U.S.C. 123(a): e.g., (1) an applicant or inventor exceeded the gross income limit; (2) an applicant or inventor had more than four other nonprovisional applications; or (3) an applicant or inventor had assigned, granted, or conveyed the application or was under an obligation to do so, to an entity that exceeds the gross income limit. Additionally, the gross income limit under 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(3) applies to each applicant’s and inventor’s income separately (i.e., the combined gross income of all of the applicants and inventors need not be below the income level in 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(3)). Further, the assignment requirement in 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) applies to each applicant and inventor (i.e., if an applicant or inventor assigns or is obligated to assign the invention to more than one assignee (e.g., half interest in the invention to two assignees), each of the assignees must meet the income limit specified in 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4)). Note also that in this context an inventor ordinarily should qualify as a small entity under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(1) and 1.27(a)(1). Under 37 CFR 1.27(a)(1), an inventor generally is a small entity and retains such status even if the inventor assigns some rights to another small entity. Similarly, to obtain micro entity status, 37 CFR 1.29(h) requires that any non-applicant assignee be a small entity.
For purposes of establishing micro entity status under the “gross income” basis, the application filing limit as set forth in 37 CFR 1.29(a)(2) includes: (i) previously filed U.S. nonprovisional applications (e.g., utility, design, plant, continuation, and divisional applications), (ii) previously filed U.S. reissue applications, and (iii) previously filed U.S. national stage applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). All such applications naming the inventor or a joint inventor are counted toward the application filing limit, whether the applications were filed before, on, or after March 19, 2013. Further, it does not matter whether the previously filed applications are pending, patented, or abandoned; they are still included when counting to determine whether the application filing limit has been reached.
The application filing limit does not include: (i) foreign applications; (ii) international (PCT) applications for which the basic U.S. national stage filing fee was not paid; and (iii) provisional applications. In addition, where an applicant, inventor, or joint inventor has assigned, or is under an obligation by contract or law to assign, all ownership rights in the application as the result of the applicant’s, inventor’s, or joint inventor’s previous employment the applicant, inventor or joint inventor is not considered to be named on the prior filed application for purposes of determining micro entity status. See 37 CFR 1.29(b).
Because the four application limit is a limit on previously filed U.S. nonprovisional applications, reissues applications, and national stage applications, the maximum number of applications in which fees can be paid at the micro entity discount rate can vary from 0 to 5 for any given inventor. For example, consider a person named as a sole inventor in five previously filed U.S. nonprovisional patent applications in which all ownership rights have remained with the sole inventor (i.e., no assignment or licensing of patent rights ever occurred). This person was not named as an inventor in any other application. Because all five applications count against the application filing limit, this person cannot be named as an inventor in any future-filed application entitled to micro entity status on the “gross income” basis under 37 CFR 1.29(a). (However, the filing of a future sixth application will not jeopardize entitlement to micro entity status in any of the five applications already filed.) If the first two of the inventor’s five applications went abandoned prior to March 19, 2013, then the inventor would not have had the opportunity to pay fees at the micro entity discount rate in those two applications. (The micro entity discount became available for the first time on March 19, 2013.) However if the third-filed application issued as a patent, then for purposes of paying maintenance fees, the applicant-turned-patentee (the sole inventor in this example) may establish entitlement to micro entity status on the “gross income” basis if all 4 requirements under 37 CFR 1.29(a) are met. If the fourth and fifth filed applications are still pending, then similarly, the inventor may establish entitlement to micro entity status on the “gross income” basis if the four requirements under 37 CFR 1.29(a) are met.
For purposes of qualifying for micro-entity status under 37 CFR 1.29(a) and paying fees at the micro entity discount, it is required that no inventor had a gross income exceeding the gross income limit in the calendar year preceding the time of fee payment. This gross income level requirement also applies to any applicant who is not an inventor (e.g., an assignee-applicant). 35 U.S.C. 123(a)(3) and 37 CFR 1.29(a)(3) define the gross income limit as “three times median household income for [the] preceding calendar year, as most recently as reported by the Bureau of the Census.” Based on that definition, the gross income limit is reported on the USPTO website at www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and-regulations/ micro-entity-status-gross-income-limit as the “maximum qualifying gross income.” At the time any fee is to be paid in the micro entity amount, it is required that no inventor and no non-inventor applicant (if any) have a preceding calendar year’s gross income exceeding the “maximum qualifying gross income” posted on the USPTO website.
It should be noted that “gross income” means total income. “Gross income” and “adjusted gross income” are not the same thing. Adjusted gross income is defined as gross income minus adjustments to income. For purposes of micro entity status it is “gross income” – not “adjusted gross income” that matters. Section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 61(a)) provides that: "[e]xcept as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items: (1) Compensation for services, including fees, commissions, fringe benefits, and similar items; (2) Gross income derived from business; (3) Gains derived from dealings in property; (4) Interest; (5) Rents; (6) Royalties; (7) Dividends; (8) Alimony and separate maintenance payments; (9) Annuities; (10) Income from life insurance and endowment contracts; (11) Pensions; (12) Income from discharge of indebtedness; (13) Distributive share of partnership gross income; (14) Income in respect of a decedent; and (15) Income from an interest in an estate or trust."
With the coming of each new year, the “preceding calendar year” advances, and anyone’s preceding calendar year’s gross income may change as a result. Therefore, if the prosecution of an application under micro entity status extends across multiple calendar years, each applicant, inventor, and joint inventor must verify that the gross income limit for the requisite calendar year is met to maintain eligibility for the micro entity discount. If the gross income limit is no longer met, then a notification of loss of entitlement to micro entity status must be filed in the application to remove micro entity status. On the other hand, it is possible a small entity applicant not meeting the gross income limits specified in 37 CFR 1.29(a)(3) and (4) in the calendar year in which the application was filed could meet the 37 CFR 1.29(a)(3) and (4) gross income limits in the calendar year in which the issue fee is paid, for example, due to a reduction in income. However, the applicant must still be a small entity at the time of issue fee payment, and the applicant must have met the application filing limit under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(2) when the application was filed.
The applicable “maximum qualifying gross income” that is reported on the USPTO website at www.uspto.gov/patent/laws-and- regulations/micro-entity-status-gross-income-limit is anticipated to change (increase or decrease) in September or October of each year. If the reported “maximum qualifying gross income” increases, then parties that met the gross income limit earlier that calendar year will continue to meet the gross income limit for the rest of the calendar year. There may also be additional parties that meet the gross income limit. If the reported “maximum qualifying gross income” decreases, however, some parties that met (e.g., barely met) the gross income limit earlier that calendar year might no longer meet the gross income limit for the remainder of the calendar year. In that event a notification of loss of entitlement to micro entity status must be filed as fees could not be paid in the micro entity amount in the relevant patent application or patent for the remainder of that calendar year.
For inventors who file tax returns jointly with their spouse, for example, determining the inventor’s gross income may not be readily apparent from the preceding calendar year’s joint tax return. Regardless of whether any inventor, or any person who is a non-inventor applicant (e.g., assignee-applicant), or any person with an “ownership interest” under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) actually filed a joint tax return rather than a separate tax return in the preceding calendar year, the gross income limit applies to the amount of income the person would have reported as gross income if that person were filing a separate tax return, which includes for example, properly accounting for that person’s portion of interest, dividends, and capital gains from joint bank or brokerage accounts.
For filings on behalf of deceased inventors, gross income from the deceased inventor’s estate or trust does not count toward the gross income limit because the trust or decedent’s estate is considered a separate legal entity. However, the deceased inventor’s legal representative acting on behalf of the deceased inventor under 37 CFR 1.43 is an “applicant” in terms of 37 CFR 1.29(a). Therefore the legal representative’s gross income in the preceding calendar year cannot exceed the gross income limit under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(3) in order to qualify for micro entity status. For example, if the deceased inventor has a surviving spouse who is named on the Application Data Sheet (ADS) as an applicant by virtue of being the legal representative of the deceased inventor, the surviving spouse’s gross income in the preceding calendar year cannot exceed the gross income limit in order to qualify for micro entity status. On the other hand, if the deceased inventor had assigned all rights in the application (or if subsequent to the inventor’s death, the legal representative assigned all rights in the application) AND the assignee that received all rights was named as an applicant (or the applicant), then it would be the assignee that would have to meet the gross income limit (under 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4)) and not the legal representative. In any event, each other joint inventor, assignee, and licensee (if any) would also have to meet the gross income limit in order to qualify for micro entity status.
Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4), the gross income limit extends to any party with an “ownership interest” from any applicant or inventor. Accordingly, for each inventor, applicant, and party with an “ownership interest,” gross income in the calendar year preceding the time of fee payment must not exceed the “maximum qualifying gross income.” Thus, the gross income limit applies to the assignee regardless of whether the assignee is identified as the applicant. For micro entity status, 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) requires that the gross income limit be met by each assignee and licensee (if any) as well as by each inventor.
An applicant is disqualified from micro entity status on the gross income basis if an inventor or an assignee-applicant transfers, or is obligated to transfer, any ownership interest in the patent application to an entity that exceeds the gross income limit. For example, consider a patent application with a sole inventor who does not exceed the gross income limit. If the inventor assigns, or is obligated to assign, all rights in the patent application to an employer that is, for example, a corporation having several million dollars in annual receipts, there can be no micro entity discount of patent fees. Depending on the size of the corporation, the small entity discount may be unavailable as well. If the corporation transfers all of its rights back to the inventor, or transfers all of its rights to some other person who does not exceed the gross income limit, such a retransfer will not result in qualification for micro entity status. The 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) certification requirement is that no ownership interest "has" been transferred, or is obligated to be transferred, to an assignee or licensee that exceeds the gross income limit. Once an assignee or licensee exceeding the gross income limit receives the ownership interest, the 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) certification requirement can no longer be met – even if the assignee or licensee retransfers rights and no longer holds any ownership interest in the application.
If prosecution of an application that is under 37 CFR 1.29(a) micro entity status extends into a new year, it is important to verify that no inventor, no non-inventor applicant, and no party with a 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) “ownership interest,” had a gross income in the new preceding calendar year that exceeds the “maximum qualifying gross income” reported on the USPTO website. If the coming of a new year results in the gross income limit not being met by any inventor, applicant or party with a 37 CFR 1.29(a)(4) “ownership interest,” then a notification of loss of entitlement to micro entity status under 37 CFR 1.29(i) must be filed in the application to remove micro entity status.
37 CFR § 1.29 Micro entity status.
(b) An applicant, inventor, or joint inventor is not considered to be named on a previously filed application for purposes of paragraph (a)(2) of this section if the applicant, inventor, or joint inventor has assigned, or is under an obligation by contract or law to assign, all ownership rights in the application as the result of the applicant’s, inventor’s, or joint inventor’s previous employment.
37 CFR 1.29(b) implements the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 123(b). 37 CFR 1.29(b) provides that an applicant, inventor, or joint inventor is not considered to be named on a previously filed application for purposes of 37 CFR 1.29(a)(2) if the applicant, inventor, or joint inventor has assigned, or is under an obligation by contract or law to assign, all ownership rights in the application as the result of the applicant’s, inventor’s, or joint inventor's previous employment.
(c) If an applicant’s, inventor’s, joint inventor’s, or entity’s gross income in the preceding calendar year is not in United States dollars, the average currency exchange rate, as reported by the Internal Revenue Service, during that calendar year shall be used to determine whether the applicant’s, inventor’s, joint inventor’s, or entity’s gross income exceeds the threshold specified in paragraph (a)(3) or (4) of this section.
Section 1.29(c) implements the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 123(c). Section 1.29(c) provides that if an applicant’s, inventor’s, joint inventor’s, or entity’s gross income in the preceding calendar year is not in United States dollars, the average currency exchange rate, as reported by the Internal Revenue Service, during that calendar year shall be used to determine whether the applicant’s, inventor’s, joint inventor’s, or entity’s gross income exceeds the threshold specified in 37 CFR 1.29(a)(3) or (a)(4). The Internal Revenue Service reports the average currency exchange rate (Yearly Average Currency Exchange Rates) on its Internet website (www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/ Yearly-Average-Currency-Exchange-Rates).
For an applicant or entity whose previous calendar year’s gross income was received partially in U.S. dollars and partially in non-United States currency, the gross income amount in non-United States currency must be converted into U.S. dollars in accordance with 37 CFR 1.29(c) and then added to the gross income amount in U.S. dollars to determine whether the applicant or entity meets the gross income requirement of 37 CFR 1.29(a)(3).
To the extent that 35 U.S.C. 123(d) (unlike 35 U.S.C. 123(a)) does not expressly require that an applicant qualify as a small entity under 37 CFR 1.27, the Office has invoked its authority under 35 U.S.C. 123(e) to “…impose… other limits on who may qualify as a micro entity…” in order to expressly require that a party claiming micro entity status via 35 U.S.C. 123(d) qualify as a small entity under 37 CFR 1.27. Accordingly, 37 CFR 1.29(d)(1) requires that an applicant claiming micro entity status on the institution of higher education basis must certify that the “applicant qualifies as a small entity as defined in § 1.27” in addition to certifying that the other requirements set forth in 35 U.S.C. 123(d)(1) or (2) are met. See MPEP § 509.02 for a discussion of the requirements for small entity status.
An applicant for micro entity status under the “institution of higher education” basis set forth in 37 CFR 1.29(d) must satisfy two requirements. First, the applicant must certify that the applicant qualifies as a small entity as defined in 37 CFR 1.27. Second, the applicant must certify that either (i) the applicant’s employer, from which the applicant obtains the majority of the applicant’s income, is an institution of higher education as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)); or (ii) the applicant has assigned, granted, conveyed, or is under an obligation by contract or law, to assign, grant, or convey, a license or other ownership interest in the particular application to such an institution of higher education.
Under 37 CFR 1.29(d)(2)(i) the applicant must certify that the applicant’s employer, from which the applicant obtains the majority of the applicant’s income, is an institution of higher education. Because only a person can have an “employer,” the applicant certifying under 37 CFR 1.29(d)(2)(i) must be a person or persons, which in most cases, means the inventor(s).
Additionally, section 103 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 provides that the term “State” means the 50 States of the United States as well as “the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, Guam, American Samoa, the United States Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Freely Associated States’’ and that the Freely Associated States means the ‘‘Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau.’’ See 20 U.S.C. 1003.
Based upon these definitions, public or non-profit institutions located in one of the 50 States or U.S. territories offering certain undergraduate educational programs credited toward a bachelor’s degree or educational programs awarding “a degree that is acceptable for admission to a graduate or professional degree program” are eligible as an “institution of higher education” for purposes of establishing micro entity status under 37 CFR 1.29(d). Except for universities or other institutions of higher education located outside the United States, any university or other U.S. institution of higher education that qualifies for small entity status by virtue of being a nonprofit organization under 37 CFR 1.27(a)(3) meets the criteria of an “institution of higher education” for micro entity status purposes.
An institution such as a non-profit research foundation, technology transfer organization, or Federal Government research laboratory does not qualify as an “institution of higher education” under the definition of “institution of higher education” set forth in the Higher Education Act of 1965 for purposes of establishing micro entity status.
Although the 37 CFR 1.29(d) basis for qualifying for micro entity status is referred to as the “institution of higher education” basis, it is not the institution of higher education that can qualify for micro entity status, but rather inventors who are employees of an institution of higher education (see 37 CFR 1.29(d)(2)(i)) or inventors or applicants who have conveyed ownership rights to an institution of higher education (see 37 CFR 1.29(d)(2)(ii)). The institution (university) logically cannot make the certifications required under 37 CFR 1.29(d)(2)(i) and (d)(2)(ii) (that the employer from which the university obtains the majority of its income is an institution of higher education as defined by section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, or that the university itself has assigned, granted, conveyed, or is under an obligation by contract or law, to assign, grant, or convey, a license or other ownership interest in the particular application).
(3) The applicant (37 CFR 1.42). Unless otherwise specified, all papers submitted on behalf of a juristic entity must be signed by a patent practitioner.
For joint inventor applicants, each joint inventor should sign a separate copy of the relevant micro entity certification form. However, if one joint inventor is appointed to prosecute the application on behalf of all the other joint inventors, then only that one joint inventor need sign the micro entity certification form. See USPTO form PTO/AIA/81, titled “Power Of Attorney To One Or More Of The Joint Inventors And Change Of Correspondence Address”, available on the USPTO forms Web page at www.uspto.gov/patent/patent-forms.
Additionally, if any applicant is an assignee or other party under 37 CFR 1.46, and the assignee or other party is a corporation or organization rather than a person, a registered practitioner must sign the certification of micro entity status. An officer of the assignee corporation, for example, is not authorized to sign a certification of micro entity status.
(g) A certification of entitlement to micro entity status need only be filed once in an application or patent. Micro entity status, once established, remains in effect until changed pursuant to paragraph (i) of this section. However, a fee may be paid in the micro entity amount only if status as a micro entity as defined in paragraph (a) or (d) of this section is appropriate on the date the fee is being paid. Where an assignment of rights or an obligation to assign rights to other parties who are micro entities occurs subsequent to the filing of a certification of entitlement to micro entity status, a second certification of entitlement to micro entity status is not required.
(h) Prior to submitting a certification of entitlement to micro entity status in an application, including a related, continuing, or reissue application, a determination of such entitlement should be made pursuant to the requirements of this section. It should be determined that each applicant qualifies for micro entity status under paragraph (a) or (d) of this section, and that any other party holding rights in the invention qualifies for small entity status under § 1.27. The Office will generally not question certification of entitlement to micro entity status that is made in accordance with the requirements of this section.
An applicant is not required to provide a certification of micro entity status with each fee payment once micro entity status has been established by filing a certification in an application. While an applicant is not required to provide such a certification with each fee payment, the applicant must still be entitled to micro entity status to pay a fee in the micro entity amount at the time of all payments of fees in the micro entity amount. Thus it must be determined whether the requirements for micro entity status exist at the time each fee payment is made. If any requirement for micro entity status is no longer met, then the applicant must notify the Office of loss of micro entity status and pay the required fee in the small entity or undiscounted amount, as appropriate.
For micro entity status on the gross income basis under 37 CFR 1.29(a), the applicant must determine that the applicant and each inventor or joint inventor still meet the applicable conditions of 37 CFR 1.29(a) to claim micro entity status. For example, the applicant must determine that neither the applicant nor inventor nor joint inventor has had a change in gross income that exceeds the “maximum qualifying gross income” as reported on the USPTO website (a new determination must be made each year because gross income may change from year to year, and micro entity status is based upon gross income in the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which the applicable fee is being paid). In addition, the applicant must determine that neither the applicant nor inventor nor joint inventor has made, or is obligated by contract or law to make, an assignment, grant, or conveyance to an entity exceeding the “maximum qualifying gross income,” and that no new inventor or joint inventor has been named in the application who does not meet the conditions specified in 37 CFR 1.29(a). See MPEP § 509.04(a), subsection I, for additional information.
For micro entity status under 35 U.S.C. 123(d), the applicant must determine that each applicant still complies with 37 CFR 1.29(d) (e.g., still obtains the majority of his or her income from an institution of higher education as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)). 37 CFR 1.29(g) also provides that where an assignment of rights or an obligation to assign rights to other parties who are micro entities occurs subsequent to the filing of a certification of entitlement to micro entity status, a second certification of entitlement to micro entity status is not required.
(i) Notification of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status must be filed in the application or patent prior to paying, or at the time of paying, any fee after the date on which status as a micro entity as defined in paragraph (a) or (d) of this section is no longer appropriate. The notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate must be signed by a party identified in § 1.33(b). Payment of a fee in other than the micro entity amount is not sufficient notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate. A notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate will not be treated as a notification that small entity status is also no longer appropriate unless it also contains a notification of loss of entitlement to small entity status under § 1.27(f)(2) [§ 1.27(g)(2)]. Once a notification of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status is filed in the application or patent, a new certification of entitlement to micro entity status is required to again obtain micro entity status.
37 CFR 1.29(i) contains provisions for a micro entity that correspond to the provisions of 37 CFR 1.27(g)(2) for a small entity. 37 CFR 1.29(i) provides that notification of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status must be filed in the application or patent prior to paying, or at the time of paying, any fee after the date on which status as a micro entity as defined in 37 CFR 1.29(a) or 1.29(d) is no longer appropriate. The notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate must be signed by a party identified in 37 CFR 1.33(b). Payment of a fee in other than the micro entity amount is not sufficient notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate. An applicant can make a simple statement that the applicant is no longer eligible for micro entity status without identifying the particular reason(s) for loss of entitlement to micro entity status.
37 CFR 1.29(i) further provides that a notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate will not be treated as a notification that small entity status is also no longer appropriate unless it also provides notification of loss of entitlement to small entity status under 37 CFR 1.27(g)(2). Thus, an applicant or patentee who files a notification that micro entity status is no longer appropriate will be treated as a small entity by default. For applications under micro entity status, regular unreduced fee status will result from: (1) a notification of loss of entitlement to micro entity status accompanied by regular unreduced fees or some other indication of loss of entitlement to small entity status; or (2) a notification of loss of entitlement to small entity status by itself.
(k) If status as a micro entity is established in good faith in an application or patent, and fees as a micro entity are paid in good faith in the application or patent, and it is later discovered that such micro entity status either was established in error, or that the Office was not notified of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status as required by paragraph (i) of this section through error, the error will be excused upon compliance with the separate submission and itemization requirements of paragraph (k)(1) of this section and the deficiency payment requirement of paragraph (k)(2) of this section.
(iv) The total deficiency payment owed, which is the sum or total of the individual deficiency owed amounts as set forth in paragraph (k)(2) of this section.
(2) The deficiency owed, resulting from the previous erroneous payment of micro entity fees, must be paid. The deficiency owed for each previous fee erroneously paid as a micro entity is the difference between the current fee amount for a small entity or non-small entity, as applicable, on the date the deficiency is paid in full and the amount of the previous erroneous micro entity fee payment. The total deficiency payment owed is the sum of the individual deficiency owed amounts for each fee amount previously and erroneously paid as a micro entity.
(3) If the requirements of paragraphs (k)(1) and (2) of this section are not complied with, such failure will either be treated at the option of the Office as an authorization for the Office to process the deficiency payment and charge the processing fee set forth in § 1.17(i), or result in a requirement for compliance within a one-month time period that is not extendable under § 1.136(a) to avoid the return of the fee deficiency payment.
(4) Any deficiency payment (based on a previous erroneous payment of a micro entity fee) submitted under this paragraph will be treated as a notification of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status under paragraph (i) of this section.
37 CFR 1.29(k) contains provisions for a micro entity that correspond to the provisions of 37 CFR 1.28(c) for a small entity. 37 CFR 1.28(c) permits an applicant or patentee to correct the erroneous payment of a patent fee in the small entity amount if status as a small entity was established in good faith, and fees as a small entity were paid in good faith. See DH Tech. Inc. v. Synergystex Int’l Inc., 154 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 1998). 37 CFR 1.29(k) provides that if: (i) an applicant or patentee establishes micro entity status in an application or patent in good faith; (ii) the applicant or patentee pays fees as a micro entity in the application or patent in good faith; and (iii) applicant or patentee later discovers that such micro entity status either was established in error, or that the Office was not notified of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status as required by 37 CFR 1.29(i) through error, the error will be excused upon compliance with the separate submission and itemization requirements of 37 CFR 1.29(k)(1) and the deficiency payment requirement of 37 CFR 1.29(k)(2).
37 CFR 1.29(k)(1) provides that any paper submitted under 37 CFR 1.29(k) must be limited to the deficiency payment (all fees paid in error) required for a single application or patent. 37 CFR 1.29(k)(1) provides that where more than one application or patent is involved, separate submissions of deficiency payments (e.g., checks) and itemizations are required for each application or patent. 37 CFR 1.29(k)(1) also provides that the paper must contain an itemization of the total deficiency payment and include the following information: (1) each particular type of fee that was erroneously paid as a micro entity, (e.g., basic statutory filing fee, two-month extension of time fee) along with the current fee amount for a small or non-small entity; (2) the micro entity fee actually paid, and the date on which it was paid; (3) the deficiency owed amount (for each fee erroneously paid); and (4) the total deficiency payment owed, which is the sum or total of the individual deficiency owed amounts as set forth in 37 CFR 1.29(k)(2).
37 CFR 1.29(k)(2) provides that the deficiency owed, resulting from the previous erroneous payment of micro entity fees, must be paid. The deficiency owed for each previous fee erroneously paid as a micro entity is the difference between the current fee amount for a small entity or non-small entity, as applicable, on the date the deficiency is paid in full and the amount of the previous erroneous micro entity fee payment. The total deficiency payment owed is the sum of the individual deficiency owed amounts for each fee amount previously and erroneously paid as a micro entity. This corresponds to the procedure for fee deficiency payments based upon the previous erroneous payment of patent fees in the small entity amount. See 37 CFR 1.28(c)(2)(i) ("[t]he deficiency owed for each previous fee erroneously paid as a small entity is the difference between the current full fee amount (for non-small entity) on the date the deficiency is paid in full and the amount of the previous erroneous (small entity) fee payment").
37 CFR 1.29(k)(3) provides that if the requirements of 37 CFR 1.29(k)(1) and (k)(2) are not complied with, such failure will either be treated at the option of the Office as an authorization for the Office to process the deficiency payment and charge the processing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(i), or result in a requirement for compliance within a one-month nonextendable time period under 37 CFR 1.136(a) to avoid the return of the fee deficiency payment.
37 CFR 1.29(k)(4) provides that any deficiency payment (based on a previous erroneous payment of a micro entity fee) submitted under 37 CFR 1.29(k) will be treated as a notification of a loss of entitlement to micro entity status under 37 CFR 1.29(i).

References: § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1306
 § 509
 v. 
 § 509
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 509
 § 1
 § 509
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 § 1
 v.