How should examiners explain reasons for distinctness or independence in restriction requirements?

Examiners must provide clear and concise reasons for holding that inventions are either independent or distinct when issuing a restriction requirement. The MPEP provides guidance on how to explain these reasons:

As stated in MPEP 808.01: “The particular reasons relied on by the examiner for holding that the inventions as claimed are either independent or distinct should be concisely stated. A mere statement of conclusion is inadequate. The reasons upon which the conclusion is based should be given.”

The MPEP further advises:

• For combination and subcombination inventions, explain why the subcombination has utility by itself or in other combinations.
• Explain why the combination doesn’t require the particulars of the subcombination.
• Treat each relationship of claimed inventions similarly.
• Use appropriate form paragraphs (8.01, 8.02, and 8.14 – 8.20.02) to explain distinctness or independence.

Examiners should refer to MPEP § 806.05 – § 806.06 for detailed guidance on explaining distinctness or independence for various types of inventions.

To learn more:

• restriction requirement
• patent examination
• MPEP
• examiner guidance