Newsflash !!

• The owners of an invention promotion operation have agreed to pay $10 million in consumer redress to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that they deceived consumers across the country. The settlement includes a cash payment of $6.9 million, plus other property valued at $3.1 million. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/07/davison.shtm


• The operators of an invention promotion business, which a judge called “one grand con game to take money away from consumers,” have been ordered to pay $60 million for violating a 1998 court order. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/09/inventionswindle.shtm


• The Federal Trade Commission has filed a civil contempt action against four individuals and eight business entities for allegedly operating a fraudulent invention promotion business in violation of a court order. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/03/ipd.shtm
  Posted - 07/07/2007
  
  
• A U.S. district court judge has ordered an invention promotion operation to pay $26 million in consumer redress and has ordered a permanent halt to the bogus claims the company used to recruit customers. http://www.uspto.gov/main/homepagenews/bak2006fapr20.htm
  Posted - 4/20/2006
  
  
• The following link to the Federal Trade Commission's electronic FOIA reading room is provided for informational purposes. The E-FOIA Amendments of 1996 mandate that frequently requested materials be included in the "reading room" because they are likely to be subject to subsequent requests. For this reason, the FTC has compiled a list of frequently requested records which are linked to responsive documents and explanatory letters previously sent by the FOIA Office in response to actual FOIA requests.
  http://www.ftc.gov/foia/frequentrequest.htm
  Posted - 2/13/2003
  
  
• The Inventors Assistance Program is providing the following link related to international filers, http://www.wipo.int/pct/en/warning/pct_warning.htm. The International Bureau of WIPO and the European Patent Office recently posted this warning about potentially misleading PCT fee communications.
  Posted - 10/18/02
  
  
• Treatment of Replies filed by Pro Se Applicants without the benefit of 37 CFR 1.8 and 1.10 and After-Final Amendments that are untimely due to incoming mail delays. For additional information please see Mail Delay Pro Se [PDF].
  Posted - 4/14/2002
  
  
• An entity doing business as the 'United States Trademark Protection Agency' is not affiliated with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
  Posted - 2/14/2001

Some contents linked to on this page require a plug-in for PDF File.