MPEP § 1201 — Introduction (Annotated Rules)
§1201 Introduction
This page consolidates and annotates all enforceable requirements under MPEP § 1201, including statutory authority, regulatory rules, examiner guidance, and practice notes. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only, it is not legal advice.
Introduction
This section addresses Introduction. Primary authority: 35 U.S.C. 134), 35 U.S.C. 134, and 37 CFR 1.181(f). Contains: 1 requirement, 2 guidance statements, 4 permissions, and 5 other statements.
Key Rules
PTAB Jurisdiction
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is "determinative of the rejection" the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is "determinative of the rejection" the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is "determinative of the rejection" the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is "determinative of the rejection" the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is "determinative of the rejection" the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is "determinative of the rejection" the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Applicants who meet certain financial thresholds and other criteria may be eligible for free legal assistance when appearing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The PTAB Pro Bono Program matches volunteer patent professionals with financially under-resourced applicants to provide free legal assistance in preparing ex parte appeals to the PTAB. Additional information can be found on the PTAB Pro Bono Program for independent inventors website at www.uspto.gov/PTABProBono.
Applicants who meet certain financial thresholds and other criteria may be eligible for free legal assistance when appearing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The PTAB Pro Bono Program matches volunteer patent professionals with financially under-resourced applicants to provide free legal assistance in preparing ex parte appeals to the PTAB. Additional information can be found on the PTAB Pro Bono Program for independent inventors website at www.uspto.gov/PTABProBono.
Applicants who meet certain financial thresholds and other criteria may be eligible for free legal assistance when appearing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The PTAB Pro Bono Program matches volunteer patent professionals with financially under-resourced applicants to provide free legal assistance in preparing ex parte appeals to the PTAB. Additional information can be found on the PTAB Pro Bono Program for independent inventors website at www.uspto.gov/PTABProBono.
Ex Parte Appeals to PTAB
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) in administering the Patent Laws makes many decisions of a substantive nature which the applicant may feel deny them the patent protection to which they are entitled. The differences of opinion on such matters can be justly resolved only by prescribing and following judicial procedures. Where the differences of opinion concern the denial of patent claims because of prior art or other patentability issues, the questions thereby raised are said to relate to the merits, and appeal procedure within the Office and to the courts has long been provided by statute (35 U.S.C. 134).
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) in administering the Patent Laws makes many decisions of a substantive nature which the applicant may feel deny them the patent protection to which they are entitled. The differences of opinion on such matters can be justly resolved only by prescribing and following judicial procedures. Where the differences of opinion concern the denial of patent claims because of prior art or other patentability issues, the questions thereby raised are said to relate to the merits, and appeal procedure within the Office and to the courts has long been provided by statute (35 U.S.C. 134).
Inter Partes Reexamination
This chapter is primarily directed to ex parte appeals. For appeals in inter partes reexamination proceedings, see 37 CFR 41.60 to 41.81 and MPEP §§ 2674 to 2683.
This chapter is primarily directed to ex parte appeals. For appeals in inter partes reexamination proceedings, see 37 CFR 41.60 to 41.81 and MPEP §§ 2674 to 2683.
AIA Effective Dates
For information pertaining to the Board’s ex parte appeal practice and procedure in effect prior to September 16, 2012, see Chapter 1200 in the MPEP 8th Edition, Rev. 9 (August 2012)(available on the USPTO web site at www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ pac/mpep/old/mpep_E8R9.htm.
Citations
| Primary topic | Citation |
|---|---|
| Ex Parte Appeals to PTAB | 35 U.S.C. § 134 |
| PTAB Jurisdiction | 37 CFR § 1.144 |
| PTAB Jurisdiction | 37 CFR § 1.181(f) |
| Inter Partes Reexamination | 37 CFR § 41.60 |
| Inter Partes Reexamination | MPEP § 2674 |
| AIA Effective Dates | MPEP § 8 |
| PTAB Jurisdiction | Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010) |
| PTAB Jurisdiction | In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) |
| PTAB Jurisdiction | In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990) |
Source Text from USPTO’s MPEP
This is an exact copy of the MPEP from the USPTO. It is here for your reference to see the section in context.
Official MPEP § 1201 — Introduction
Source: USPTO1201 Introduction [R-01.2024]
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) in administering the Patent Laws makes many decisions of a substantive nature which the applicant may feel deny them the patent protection to which they are entitled. The differences of opinion on such matters can be justly resolved only by prescribing and following judicial procedures. Where the differences of opinion concern the denial of patent claims because of prior art or other patentability issues, the questions thereby raised are said to relate to the merits, and appeal procedure within the Office and to the courts has long been provided by statute (35 U.S.C. 134).
Throughout this chapter, “Board” is used to refer the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and its predecessor organizations, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and the separate Board of Appeals and Board of Interferences.
Unless otherwise noted, the discussion of the ex parte appeal practice before the Board in this chapter is primarily directed to appeals wherein the notice of appeal was filed on or after January 23, 2012, or to proceedings commenced on or after September 16, 2012. See Pub. L. 112-29 (September 16, 2011)(known as the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act or the AIA) and final rule “Rules of Practice Before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in Ex Parte Appeals, 76 Fed. Reg. 72270 (November 22, 2011).
For information pertaining to the Board’s ex parte appeal practice and procedure in effect prior to September 16, 2012, see Chapter 1200 in the MPEP 8th Edition, Rev. 9 (August 2012)(available on the USPTO web site at www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ pac/mpep/old/mpep_E8R9.htm.
The line of demarcation between appealable matters for the Board and petitionable matters for the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Director) should be carefully observed. The Board will not ordinarily hear a question that should be decided by the Director on petition, and the Director will not ordinarily entertain a petition where the question presented is a matter appealable to the Board. Ordinarily, an objection is petitionable, and a rejection is appealable, but when the objection is “determinative of the rejection” the matter may be addressed by the Board. See In re Hengehold, 440 F.2d 1395, 1403, 169 USPQ 473, 479 (CCPA 1971) and Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 1078 (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 2010)(precedential). Some matters which have been determined to be petitionable and not appealable include: a requirement for restriction or election of species, finality, non-entry of amendments, and holdings of abandonment. As 37 CFR 1.181(f) states that any petition not filed within 2 months from the action complained of may be dismissed as untimely and since 37 CFR 1.144 states that petitions from restriction requirements must be filed no later than appeal, petitionable matters will rarely be present in a case by the time it is before the Board for a decision. In re Watkinson, 900 F.2d 230, 14 USPQ2d 1407 (Fed. Cir. 1990).
Applicants who meet certain financial thresholds and other criteria may be eligible for free legal assistance when appearing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The PTAB Pro Bono Program matches volunteer patent professionals with financially under-resourced applicants to provide free legal assistance in preparing ex parte appeals to the PTAB. Additional information can be found on the PTAB Pro Bono Program for independent inventors website at www.uspto.gov/PTABProBono.
This chapter is primarily directed to ex parte appeals. For appeals in inter partes reexamination proceedings, see 37 CFR 41.60 to 41.81 and MPEP §§ 2674 to 2683.