How are after-final amendments and evidence handled when reopening prosecution?

When reopening prosecution after an appeal, examiners must generally consider any previously unaddressed after-final amendments or evidence. According to MPEP 1207.04:

“Ordinarily any after final amendment or affidavit or other evidence that was not entered before must be entered and considered on the merits as part of the action reopening prosecution.”

However, there are exceptions when dealing with conflicting after-final amendments:

“Where more than one after final amendments that conflict with each other were filed, e.g., the same claim is replaced by more than one amendment with new proposed claims of differing scope, than the first amendment should be entered and the subsequent amendments should not be entered.”

This guidance ensures that all relevant materials are considered while maintaining clarity in the prosecution history.

To learn more:

Tags: after-final amendments, conflicting amendments, evidence consideration, Reopening Prosecution