Q: How does the term "applicant" apply in reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 257?

In ex parte reexamination ordered under 35 U.S.C. 257 , the term "applicant" is interpreted differently than in standard patent applications. According to MPEP 2818.01 : " Any reference to 'applicant' in 37 CFR 1.56(b) will be read as 'patent owner' in the context of a supplemental examination proceeding and any resulting ex parte reexamination proceeding under 35 U.S.C. 257, because these proceedings are only available to a patent owner. " This interpretation is important when considering the duty of disclosure and material to patentability standards in these proceedings. It reflects the fact that supplemental examination and resulting reexamination are post-grant proceedings initiated by the patent owner, not an applicant seeking a new patent. This distinction ensures that the appropriate party (the patent owner) is held responsible for compliance with the relevant regulations and standards throughout the supplemental examination and any resulting reexamination process. To learn more: ex parte reexamination 35 U.S.C. 257 applicant patent owner supplemental examination

Q: How does the term "applicant" apply in reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 257?

In ex parte reexamination ordered under 35 U.S.C. 257 , the term "applicant" is interpreted differently than in standard patent applications. According to MPEP 2818.01 : " Any reference to 'applicant' in 37 CFR 1.56(b) will be read as 'patent owner' in the context of a supplemental examination proceeding and any resulting ex parte reexamination proceeding under 35 U.S.C. 257, because these proceedings are only available to a patent owner. " This interpretation is important when considering the duty of disclosure and material to patentability standards in these proceedings. It reflects the fact that supplemental examination and resulting reexamination are post-grant proceedings initiated by the patent owner, not an applicant seeking a new patent. This distinction ensures that the appropriate party (the patent owner) is held responsible for compliance with the relevant regulations and standards throughout the supplemental examination and any resulting reexamination process. To learn more: ex parte reexamination 35 U.S.C. 257 applicant patent owner supplemental examination

Question 1

How does the term "applicant" apply in reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 257?

Accepted Answer

In ex parte reexamination ordered under 35 U.S.C. 257, the term "applicant" is interpreted differently than in standard patent applications. According to MPEP 2818.01:

"Any reference to 'applicant' in 37 CFR 1.56(b) will be read as 'patent owner' in the context of a supplemental examination proceeding and any resulting ex parte reexamination proceeding under 35 U.S.C. 257, because these proceedings are only available to a patent owner."

This interpretation is important when considering the duty of disclosure and material to patentability standards in these proceedings. It reflects the fact that supplemental examination and resulting reexamination are post-grant proceedings initiated by the patent owner, not an applicant seeking a new patent.

This distinction ensures that the appropriate party (the patent owner) is held responsible for compliance with the relevant regulations and standards throughout the supplemental examination and any resulting reexamination process.

To learn more:

Question 2

How does the term "applicant" apply in reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 257?

Accepted Answer