by Dennis Crouch
In an unprecedented move, the Secretary of Commerce is terminating all current appointments to the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) and Trademark Public Advisory Committee (TPAC), effectively removing the entire membership of both committees. New members will apparently be appointed shortly, with the USPTO planning to proceed with previously scheduled public committee meetings in May 2025. The statute requires that “any vacancy on an Advisory Committee shall be filled within 90 days after it occurs.”
Although my memory is sometimes faulty, I believe that this is the first time in the committees’ 25 year history that an incoming presidential administration has dismissed all members. The dismissed PPAC includes Loletta Darde, Earl Bright, Henry Hadad, Lateef Mtima, Marvin J. Slepian, Olivia Tsai, Maria Anderson, Idris McKelvey, and Jennifer Yokoyama. The last three of these were appointed in January 2025 — making them immediately suspect to the new administration seeking to make dramatic departures from approaches taken by President Biden’s administration. In general, this group was all put in place under President Biden and would have likely been a contentious group to deal with — potentially authoring negative reports and asking difficult questions.
The new committees will be more friendly to the new administration, but my hope is that they will still be able to provide independent guidance and counsel to the USPTO Director. The effectiveness of these advisory committees has always depended on their ability to bring diverse perspectives and constructive criticism to USPTO operations, rather than simply rubber-stamping agency decisions. While political alignment with the administration may facilitate communication, the value here is really derived from member expertise, connection to practice, and willingness to challenge assumptions when necessary.
The PPAC and TPAC were established by Congress in 1999 as part of the American Inventors Protection Act to provide stakeholder input on USPTO operations. Under 35 U.S.C. § 5(a)(1), committee members “serve at the pleasure of the Secretary of Commerce,” giving the Secretary broad discretion over appointments.
Statutorily, each advisory committee consists of nine voting members who represent diverse USPTO users. For the Patent Committee, the law requires representation from both large and small entity applicants, with at least 25 percent of members representing small entities and at least one independent inventor. Members must have “substantial background and achievement in finance, management, labor relations, science, technology, and office automation.”
As a matter of statutory authority under 35 U.S.C. § 5, the Secretary of Commerce has unquestioned power to make these changes. However, the move raises questions about committee continuity and institutional knowledge at a time when the patent system faces numerous challenges, including implementation of artificial intelligence policies and ongoing concerns about patent eligibility.