Customs and Border Protection
-
Comments to CBP Regarding Its Proposal to Amend US Customs and Border Protection Regulations Pertaining to Disclosure of Information Regarding Abandoned Merchandise
November 15, 2019
The American Intellectual Property Law Association submitted a letter to US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to present its views with respect to the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Amend U.S. Customs and Border Protection Regulations Pertaining to Disclosure of Information Regarding Abandoned Merchandise 19 CFR Parts 127 and 133 dated August 27 2019 (the NPRM). -
Letter in Support of CBP's Efforts to Modernize
February 2, 2019
The American Intellectual Property Law Association submitted a letter to the US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) supporting its efforts to modernize to meet the challenges of today’s trade environment and to proactively prepare for future trade environments, particularly as the importance of intellectual property rights in the global economy continues to rise. -
Comments to CBP Regarding Its Proposal to Amend 19 CFR Parts 133 and 151
July 25, 2012
The American Intellectual Property Law Association submitted a letter to US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to aid the Agency with its proposal to amend 19 CFR Parts 133 and 151 to clarify and expand the information disclosed to intellectual property rights holders in an effort to combat counterfeiting.
Recent Advocacy
-
AIPLA Comments to USPTO on PTAB NPRM
December 3, 2025
Arlington, VA. December 2, 2025 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments in response to the USPTO's October 17, 2025, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Revisions to the PTAB's Rules of Practice. -
AIPLA Comments to UK IPO on Designs Framework Consultation
December 1, 2025
Arlington, VA. November 25, 2025 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments in response to the UK IPO’s Designs Consultation published in September 2025 (the “Consultation”). -
AIPLA Comments on the UK IPO’s Standards Essential Patents Consultation
October 7, 2025
Arlington, VA. October 7, 2025 – The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the UK Intellectual Property Office (UK IPO) regarding its Standards Essential Patents (SEP) Consultation published in July 2025. AIPLA expressed support for the UK IPO’s goal of improving predictability and efficiency in SEP licensing but emphasized the need for a balanced approach that protects both SEP holders and implementers.
-
AIPLA Files Brief in Support of None of the Parties in Abitron Austria GmbH v. Hetronic International, Inc.
January 1, 2023
Arlington, VA. January 1, 2023 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) filed a merits-stage amicus curiae brief in the U.S. Supreme Court case of Abitron Austria GmbH et al. v. Hetronic Int’l Inc., Case. No. 21-1043. -
AIPLA Comments on the Draft Amendment of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China
December 22, 2022
Arlington, VA. December 22, 2022 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to China’s State Administration of Market Regulation on the Draft Amendment of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People's Republic of China.
-
AIPLA Comments on the Draft Revised Chinese Patent Examination Guidelines
December 19, 2022
Arlington, VA. December 19, 2022 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) on the Draft Revised Chinese Patent Examination Guidelines.
-
AIPLA Comments on USPTO’s Diversion Program
November 10, 2022
Arlington, VA. November 7, 2022 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the United States Patent and Trademark Office on the Office of Enrollment and Discipline’s (OED) Diversion Pilot Program. -
AIPLA Comments to USPTO on Subject Matter Guidance
October 21, 2022
Arlington, VA. October 21, 2022 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the United States Patent and Trademark Office on the Office’s guidance on patent subject matter eligibility under Section 101 of the Patent Act.