What is the significance of In re Oguie in patent disclaimer cases?
This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.
The case of In re Oguie is significant in patent disclaimer cases, particularly those involving failure to present claims for interference. According to MPEP 2304.04(c), both Form Paragraphs 7.48.aia and 7.48.fti cite this case:
“This amounts to a concession that, as a matter of law, the patentee is the first inventor in this country. See In re Oguie, 517 F.2d 1382, 186 USPQ 227 (CCPA 1975).”
The In re Oguie case established the legal principle that failure to engage in interference proceedings when notified amounts to a disclaimer of the subject matter. This case is used as a legal basis for rejecting claims when an applicant fails to present claims or take necessary steps for interference after being notified of potentially interfering subject matter.
- Rejections Based on Disclaimer Must Use Specific ParagraphsMPEP 2304.04(c)Recommended
- Requirement for Interference After NotificationMPEP 2304.04(c)Required
- Requirement for Interference Notification After Refusal to Copy ClaimsMPEP 2304.04(c)Required
- Form Paragraph Must Follow Specific ParagraphsMPEP 2304.04(c)Required
- Basis for Finding of Obviousness Must Be IncludedMPEP 2304.04(c)Recommended
- Basis for Obviousness Must Be Included in Pre-AIA RejectionMPEP 2304.04(c)Recommended
- Insert Patent Number and Examiner’s Basis for Obviousness FindingMPEP 2304.04(c)Permitted
- Claims with Pre-AIA Filing Dates Require Special ExaminationMPEP 2304.04(c)Recommended