Most outgoing Presidential administrations push through a few regulations in the final weeks of their tenure in a last ditch effort to exert their influence on federal law.  We had reason to believe the Bush administration was different, though – way back in May, Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten issued instructions that final versions of such last ditch regulations should be issued no later than November 1, 2008.

The Bolten memo is apparently set to be ignored, though.  According to this New York Times article, no less that twenty ‘highly contentious’ rules are set to be finalized after the soft November 1 deadline and before inauguration day.

Will we see any new regulations in the patent arena?  Not likely.  Although the ‘highly contentious’ draft IDS and Markush claim regulations remain in limbo, the Dudas-directed PTO has previously indicated that it does not intend to finalize these rules. Also, we’ve passed the 60 day deadline that accommodates the typical lag time for new rules to become effective before inauguration and provides opportunity for a new President to modify or delay last ditch regulations.

Certainly anything is possible, though.  Remember that the Office recently resurrected the Practitioner Maintenance Fee regulation after it sat dormant for five years.

Cross your fingers.

AIPLA is reporting that Margaret Focarino, USPTO Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, announced at its recent Annual Meeting in Washington, DC that the proposed rules relating to Information Disclosure Statements and alternative claim language (Markush claiming) will not be published as final rules by the current administration.

The two controversial rules packages have remained in limbo for years, leaving many to wonder whether they would be the subject of a final push for finalization in the waning days of the Jon Dudas-directed administration. The AIPLA report seemingly kills this possibility.

At the time of writing this post, the USPTO “Proposed Rule Changes” page does not mention this announcement.

The fate of these proposed rule changes, like that of many other reform efforts of the Office, now lies in the hands of the to-be-named new Director.