Can a follow-up requirement be issued after a reply to a 37 CFR 1.105 requirement?

Question

Accepted Answer

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based) BlueIron Update: 2024-09-10 7 Rules 5 Related FAQs 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. Yes, a follow-up requirement can be issued after a reply to a 37 CFR 1.105 requirement, but only when it is both reasonable and warranted based on the specific circumstances of the case. MPEP 704.12(b) states: “Depending on the facts surrounding the requirement and the reply, a follow up requirement may be made where both reasonable and warranted.” This might occur if the initial reply was unclear, incomplete, or raised new questions that need to be addressed for a proper examination of the application. Related Rules from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 7 rules Collapse Requirement for Follow-Up When Reasonable and Warranted MPEP 704.12(b) Permitted Requirement for Information Under 37 CFR 1.105 MPEP 704.12(b) Required Petition to Withdraw or Modify 105 Requirement MPEP 704.14(c) Permitted Petitions Do Not Extend Reply Period for 37 CFR 1.105 Requirement MPEP 704.14(c) Good Faith Effort Required for Information Request MPEP 704.12(b) Required Unknown Information Reply Allowed MPEP 704.12(b) Required Unknown Information Reply Generally Sufficient MPEP 704.12(b) Required Other Related FAQs 5 FAQs Collapse What are the time limits for responding to an examiner&#8217;s requirement for information under MPEP 704? Do applicants need to prove that required information was not readily attainable? How should applicants respond if information remains unknown after a reasonable inquiry? What constitutes a complete reply to a 37 CFR 1.105 requirement? When might a reply stating information is unknown or not readily available be insufficient?