Deposit Account Authorization
`
`Page 1 of 1
`
`(66) Deposit Account Authorizations
` The rules of practice were amended effective Oct. 1, 1982, at 37 CFR
`1.25(b) to state that: "A general authorization to charge all fees,
`or only certain fees, set forth in 1.16 to 1.18 to a deposit
`account may be filed in an individual application, either for the entire
`pendency of the application or with respect to a particular paper
`filed." A general authorization would not apply to document supply
`fees under 1.19, such as those required for certified copies; to
`post-issuance fees under 1.20 such as those required for maintenance
`fees; or to miscellaneous fees and charges under 1.21, such as
`assignment recording fees.
` Many applications filed prior to Oct. 1, 1982, contain broad language
`authorizing any additional fees which might have been due to be charged
`to a deposit account. The Patent and Trademark Office does not interpret
`such broad authorizations, filed in an application on or after Oct. 1,
`1982, will be interpreted as authorization to charge the issue fee; as
`well as any other fee set forth in 1.16, 1.17 or 1.18. Fees under
`sections 1.19, 1.20 and 1.21 will not be charged as a result of a
`general authorization under section 1.25.
` It is recommended that authorizations to charge fees to deposit
`accounts include reference to the particular fees or fee sections of the
`rules which applicant intends to authorize. For example, if filing and
`processing fees under 1.16 and 1.17 only are intended to be
`included in the authorization, and not the issue fee under 1.18, the
`authorization could read: "The Commissioner is hereby authorized to
`charge any fees under 37 CFR 1.16 and 1.17 which may be required during
`the entire pendency of the application to Deposit Account No.(cid:31)is2p(cid:31)."
`Such an authorization would clearly exclude issue fees under 37 CFR 1.18
`while including all the filing and processing fees listed in 37 CFR 1.16
`and 1.17. Similarly, if it were intended to authorize the charging of
`fees relating only to a specific paper, the authorization could read
`"The Commissioner 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.(cid:31)is2p(cid:31)." Such authorizations would cover situations in which a check
`to cover a filing and processing fee under 37 CFR 1.16 and 1.17 was
`omitted or was for an amount less than the amount required.
` It is extremely important that the authorization be clear and
`unambiguous. If applicants file authorizations which are ambiguous and
`which deviate from the usual forms of authorizations, the Office may not
`interpret the authorizations in the manner applicants intend. In such
`cases applicants could be subject to further expenses, petitions, etc.
`in order to correct fees which were not charged as intended due to an
`ambiguous authorization.
`July 1, 1983 GERALD J. MOSSINGHOFF
` Commissioner of Patents
` and Trademarks
` [1032 OG 32]
`
`http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/og/con/files/cons066.htm
`
`3/31/2015
`
`eBay et al., Ex.1012, p.1