Protecting Your Designation Before the College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents (CPATA): 

Disciplinary Defence and Federal Court Judicial Reviews for IP Professionals

The Landscape Has Changed

Since the transition from CIPO to the College of Patent Agents and Trademark Agents (CPATA), the regulatory environment for IP professionals in Canada has hardened. What was once handled as an administrative error or a client service issue is now increasingly prosecuted as professional misconduct.

At Tamir Litigation Law Firm, we understand the unique pressure of IP practice. We know that a missed Section 73 deadline is not just a “mistake”, it is a potential competency allegation. We defend Patent Agents and Trademark Agents against complaints, investigations, and disciplinary proceedings. 

We Defend Agents Facing Allegations Of:

  1. Professional Incompetence: Allegations arising from missed statutory deadlines, abandonment of applications, or errors in drafting.
  2. Breach of the Code of Conduct: Issues regarding candour, conflicts of interest, or withdrawal of services (Section 34/35 of the Regulations).
  3. Practice Management Failures: Investigations into client communication (ghosting), file transfers, or supervision of trainees/Class 3 licensees.
  4. Unauthorized Practice: Defence for agents accused of practicing while suspended or restrictions on scope.

Why You Need a Litigator, Not Just an IP Lawyer:

Many Patent Agents instinctively turn to other IP lawyers for advice. However, a disciplinary hearing is not a patent trial; it is a prosecution of your character and competence.

You need a Regulatory Defence Lawyer who understands:

  1. Administrative Law: How to challenge the College’s investigation before it reaches the Discipline Committee.
  2. The CPATA Act : Navigating the specific procedural powers of the Registrar and the Investigation Committee.
  3. Appeals to  Federal Court: If the College makes an error of law, we are prepared to take the matter to Judicial Review in the Federal Court.

Our Approach to CPATA Discipline:

Early Intervention: The best victory is the one that never becomes public. We engage with the College at the investigation stage to provide context, explanations, and mitigation that can prevent a referral to discipline.

Settlement & Resolution: Negotiating remediation agreements that protect your license while satisfying the regulator.

Contested Hearings: vigorously defending your reputation when the allegations are unfounded. 

 Industry Insights:

In CPATA v. Fincham (2025 CPATA 5), the Discipline Committee confirmed a misconduct finding against a Patent Agent post-mortem. The Agent ignored the regulator throughout 2024, earning a guilty finding solely for "ghosting", the underlying client complaints were actually dismissed. When he vanished during the penalty phase, the College hired a private investigator who confirmed his January 2025 passing. Yet, the Committee refused to vacate the verdict, issuing an August 2025 order confirming the misconduct on the public record. This proves the Duty to Cooperate is absolute. If the regulator will hire an investigator to perfect the record, do not ignore their emails.