Diversity Roundtable

July 22, 2020 3:00 PM to 4:30 PM




Fee: Free

Register Now

As mentioned in the AIPLA Diversity Committee Wellness Check held on Wednesday, June 24,  the Diversity in IP Law Committee is hosting a virtual roundtable discussion on Wednesday, July 22 from 3-4:30 pm (EDT).

The program will address "Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion:  Practical Approaches to Make a Difference".  Our program will encourage all participants to share diversity, equity and inclusion ("DEI") practices that have been implemented at their respective organizations so that we can all learn from each other and take insights back with us after the program.  The discussion will be facilitated by speakers from in-house and private practice to help lead break-out discussions on the following themes:

1. Ensuring the Right Stakeholders are Involved in DEI

  • Who are the stakeholders and how should they be involved in DEI discussions?
  • How to balance the burden placed on black/minority attorneys to lead DEI efforts.

2. Allyship: Facilitating Allyship, and Having Respectful and Positive Discussions of Race and Racism

  • How to be better allies.
  • Being an ally both at the office and in our personal lives.

3. Isolation & COVID-19:  How to Address Diversity During Isolation

Save the date of Wednesday, July 22nd at 3pm EDT, and register below.


To assist our diversity efforts in our IP Community, please consider making a small donation to the Foundation for the Advancement of Diversity in IP (formerly AIPLEF) at the following link (donate link at top right corner): www.diversityiniplaw.org/about

Add to:




  • USPTO Main Entrance AIPLA Comments on Discretion to Institute Trials Before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

    December 3, 2020

    AIPLA filed a response to the USPTO’s October 20, 2020 request for comments on discretion to institute trials in inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review (PGR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The USPTO’s request solicits input on whether rulemaking is necessary and the type of rules it should adopt, but does not propose any rules. ​
  • Supreme Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, v. ARTHREX, INC. ET AL., Respondents. Case No. 19-1434, 19-1452, amicus brief filed 12/2/2020.

    December 2, 2020

    AIPLA’s brief supports reversal of the Federal Circuit’s decision and argues that Supreme Court precedent does not support such a rigid, factor-specific approach, instead favoring a flexible analysis to assess whether an officer is “principal” or “inferior.” The brief explains that, while the question is a close one, the totality of the circumstances under this flexible approach supports finding that APJs are inferior officers who are constitutionally appointed.
  • David Berdan USPTO Appoints David Berdan as General Counsel

    November 10, 2020

    As General Counsel, Mr. Berdan will serve as the principal legal advisor to the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO. Mr. Berdan will also supervise the Office of General Counsel and its three component offices: the Office of the Solicitor, the Office of General Law, and the Office of Enrollment and Discipline. Over the past 25 years, Mr. Berdan has served in a variety of important legal positions, most recently, as General Counsel and Compliance Officer of Gaming Arts. Mr. Berdan will begin his new role at the USPTO on Monday, November 16.
  • Continuing Legal Education USPTO USPTO Released Proposed Continuing Legal Education Guidelines

    October 14, 2020

    On October 9, The USPTO published a notice seeking public input on proposed guidelines regarding continuing legal education (CLE). As we noted in an earlier notice, the final rule published on August 3, 2020, will require beginning March 1, 2022, that registered patent practitioners and individuals granted limited recognition to practice before the USPTO in patent matters, biennially submit a mandatory registration statement.
  • Supreme Court Supreme Court Will Decide If PTAB Violates Appointments Clause

    October 13, 2020

    On October 13, 2020, the Supreme Court agreed to decide whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as created by the AIA, violates the Appointments Clause in Article II of the Constitution. The Court granted certiorari in three consolidated cases (United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al. 19-1434; Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al. v. Arthrex, Inc., et al., 19-1452; and Arthrex, Inc., v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., et al., 19-1458), but limited its review to two specific questions