AIPLA CLE Webinar: IP in Space
November 20, 2024 12:30 PM to 2:00 PM
Credits
Up to 90 Mins CLE Pending
Registration
Coming Soon!
Presented by:
Rachel Lovejoy, Space Exploration Technologies Corp
Michelle L.D. Hanlon, Air and Space Law Program, University of Mississippi
Steven Wood, Vela Wood Law Firm
This event is free to AIPLA members who are not requesting CLE. Standard webinar pricing applies to those requesting CLE. CLE is included for our All-Access Pass holders and Corporate Subscribers.
Pricing below only applies to those requesting CLE
Registration Type | AIPLA Member Rate | Non-Member Rate |
Individual Registration | $99 | $249 |
2-5 Attendees per Site | $249 | $399 |
6-10 Attendees per Site | $449 | $599 |
11-15 Attendees per Site | $649 | $799 |
16-20 Attendees per Site | $749 | $899 |
21+ Attendees per Site | $849 | $999 |
Special rate for AIPLA Solo Practitioner Members: $65
Special rate for AIPLA Student Members: $10
In response to Covid-19, AIPLA has put in-place a new process for Multiple Attendee Site registrations that allows each site registrant to participate in the webinar independently. Contact cle@aipla.org at least 3 business days prior to the live webinar for site registrations.
Paid Registration includes:
- CLE certification/processing for applicable states. Reference CLE Information below for complete details.
- Webinar materials, including complete CLE processing information, accessible 24-48 hours before webinar date.
Cancellation Policy:
To get full refund, registrant must request refund five (5) days prior to live event. If less than five (5) days, registrant is transferred to product.
System requirements:
Webinar access is compatible with any Windows 7 or later computer, Android OS devices, or Apple/iOS devices.
Accessibility for hearing impaired:
AIPLA’s webinars are available and accessible to individuals who are hearing impaired. If anyone at your location would like to know more about accommodations, please contact cle@aipla.org. We ask that you let us know at least 7 business days out from the webinar, to ensure that we can identify and deploy the solution that best fits our registrants needs.
CLE INFORMATION
CLE is approved with the following states:
- Alaska
- California
- Missouri
- New Jersey (Under New Jersey's Reciprocity Rule)
- New York (Under New York's Approved Jurisdiction Policy)
- Pennsylvania
- Texas
- Vermont
AIPLA will apply for CLE accreditation in the following states:
- Florida
- Illinois
- Minnesota
- Ohio
- Tennessee
- Virginia
- Washington
For information on CLE accreditation in all other states, please contact our CLE Department at cle@aipla.org. CLE credit may be available, but will require additional time for approval and COA delivery.
CLE Restrictions:
ATTENTION attorneys in Louisiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Utah
These states mandate attorneys can only view a webinar independently at their own computer to receive CLE credit. Multiple attendees prohibited.
ATTENTION attorneys in Alabama and Rhode Island
AIPLA does not submit courses for approval in Alabama or Rhode Island. Attendees needing credit in these states may select the free, no CLE option to watch the webinar and use course materials and their certificate of attendance to request course approval directly from the State Bars.
ATTENTION attorneys in Arizona
Arizona does not certify courses or providers. Arizona lawyers are required to independently review AZ's regulations and make their own determination that it qualifies for credit towards their MCLE requirements. MCLE Regulation 104(A) identifies the standards to apply. AIPLA will email an attendance affidavit to registrants requesting AZ CLE credit after the webinar.
ATTENTION attorneys in New Hampshire
New Hampshire attendees must self-determine whether a program is eligible for credit, and self-report their attendance according to NH Supreme Court Rule 53. The New Hampshire Minimum Continuing Legal Education (NHMCLE) Board does not approve or accredit CLE activities for the NH Minimum CLE requirement.
Disclaimer: AIPLA is a nonprofit national bar association. The sole purpose of this CLE program is to provide educational and informational content. AIPLA does not provide legal services or advice. The opinions, views and other statements expressed by contributors to this CLE program are solely those of the contributors. These opinions, views and statements of the contributors do not necessarily represent those of AIPLA and should not be construed as such.
Add to:
News
-
AIPLA Comments to USPTO on Statutory Experimental Use Exceptions
October 1, 2024
Arlington, VA. September 26, 2024 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the USPTO in response their request for comments on the current state of the common law experimental use exception and whether legislative action should be considered to enact such an exception. -
AIPLA Writes Letter in Support of S. 2140, Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, S. 2220, PREVAIL Act, and S. 4713, IDEA Act
September 17, 2024
AIPLA Writes Letter in Support of S. 2140, Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, S. 2220, PREVAIL Act, and S. 4713, IDEA Act -
AIPLA Files Amicus Brief in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers, Inc.
September 9, 2024
Arlington, VA. September 6, 2024 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) has filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Dewberry Group, Inc. v. Dewberry Engineers, Inc., expressing concern over the Fourth Circuit's decision regarding the scope of a district court's discretion under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a). -
AIPLA Comments on Withdrawal of Changes to the Post Registration Response Deadlines
August 20, 2024
Arlington, VA. August 19, 2024 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the USPTO on their recent Withdrawal of Changes to Post Registration Response Deadlines. -
AIPLA Comments to USPTO on AI Generated Prior Art
July 30, 2024
Arlington, VA. July 29, 2024 - The American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) submitted comments to the USPTO in response to their Request for Comments Regarding the Impact of the Proliferation of Artificial Intelligence on Prior Art, the Knowledge of a Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art, and Determinations of Patentability Made in View of the Foregoing (“the RFC”).