MPEP Q & A 151: Situations Where a Practitioner May Withdraw From Representing a Client According to 37 C.F.R. 11.116

mpep-podcast-800

Question:

List two situations where a practitioner may withdraw from representing a client according to 37 C.F.R. 11.116.

Answer:

A practitioner may withdraw from representing a client if:

  • Withdrawal can be accomplished without material adverse effect on the interests of the client;
  • The client persists in a course of action involving the practitioner’s services that the practitioner reasonably believes is criminal or fraudulent;
  • The client has used the practitioner’s services to perpetrate a crime or fraud;
  • A client insists upon taking action that the practitioner considers repugnant or with which the practitioner has a fundamental disagreement;
  • The client fails substantially to fulfill an obligation to the practitioner regarding the practitioner’s services and has been given reasonable warning that the practitioner will withdraw unless the obligation is fulfilled;
  • The representation will result in an unreasonable financial burden on the practitioner or has been rendered unreasonably difficult by the client; or
  • Other good cause for withdrawal exists.

Chapter Details:

The answer to this question can be found in the following supplement: Changes to Representation of Others Before the USPTO Final Rules. This is a special supplement that at the time of this recording is currently being tested on the Patent Bar exam. Depending on future changes to the supplement and the MPEP, the question and answer may not be applicable.

Section Summary:

This question and answer comes from the following supplement: Changes to Representation of Others Before the USPTO Final Rules. It specifically comes from 37 C.F.R. 11.116 which covers declining or terminating representation.