Model Patent Prosecution Templates
AIPLA's Patent Law Committee maintains a collection of sample documents related to day-to-day patent prosecution. These documents are exemplary and may not be ideal for every situation. Use them at your own risk.*
Member log-in required to access files.
Model Response Shells:
Each of these documents contains a comprehensive shell document that can be used to formulate a response to 35 U.S.C. 112, 102, 103, or 101 rejections made by a patent examiner during prosecution.
Model Appeal Brief: (Doc) (PDF)
This document contains the overall structure of appeal brief with a section for drafting responses to point out error in rejections made in 35 U.S.C. 112, 102, 103, 101, and obviousness-type double patenting rejections. The model appeal brief includes summaries of the relevant portions of the PTAB’s designated informative and precedential decisions applicable to ex parte appeals along with associated Federal Circuit case law.
Model Reply Brief: (Doc) (PDF)
This document contains the overall structure of a reply brief along with relevant case law summaries to use for handling new grounds of rejection in an Examiner’s Answer.
*Nothing included in these sample documents or elsewhere on this site should be considered legal advise on the part of AIPLA or any of its members.
Registration
The annual Global Networking Event connects intellectual property practitioners from around the world for a day of networking, education, and creating meaningful connections. This year’s theme, Innovation and Collaboration, is an opportunity for the AIPLA Women in IP Law Committee to come together and discuss how women drive innovation and foster collaboration in their workplace.
Events will be taking place on April 3, 2025 in the following locations:
- Boston - Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo
- Chicago - Leydig, Voit & Mayer
- Des Moines – McKee Voorhees & Sease
- Detroit - Miller Johnson
- Greenville - Dority & Manning
- Houston – StoneTurn
- Indianapolis - Peele Law Group
- Louisville - Lynch, Cox, Gilman & Goodman
- New York City - Baker Botts
- Oklahoma City - Dunlap Codding
- Raleigh - Myers Bigel
- Rochester - Harter Secrest & Emery
- Washington - Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox
- Toronto - Smart & Biggar
- Ottawa - Marks & Clerk
- Hong Kong - Eagle IP
- Hangzhou - Osha Bergman Watanabe & Burton
- Taguig - Hechanova & Co.
- Mumbai - Krishna & Saurastri Associates
- Jakarta - Prawiranegara Intl Patent & Trademark Law Office
- New Delhi - LexOrbis
- Chennai - LexOrbis
- Hyderabad - LexOrbis
- Ahmedabad – LexOrbis
- Mangalore - DuxLegis Attorneys
- Varanasi - DuxLegis Attorneys
- Pune - LexOrbis
- Bangalore - LexOrbis
- Kolkata - Chadha & Chadha
- Gurugram - Chadha & Chadha
- Dublin - FR Kelly
- Dusseldorf - Hoyng Rokh Monegier
- Kyiv - IPStyle Patent Law Company
- Leeds - Page White
- London - Collyer Bristow
- Manchester - Mewburn Ellis
- Madrid - Denae
- Milan - Società Italiana Brevetti S.p.A (SIB) and Jacobacci Avvocati
- Amsterdam - Hogan Lovells
- Paris - Gowling WLG
- Tel Aviv - Zilber IP and Magnus Metal and Fischer FBC and Bold Marketing!
- Buenos Aires - Berken IP
- Rio De Janeiro - Di Blasi Parente
- Sao Paolo - Daniel Law
- Mexico City - Becerril
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________