MPEP § 903.07(a) — Cross-Referencing Design and Plant Applications — Keep Systematic Notes During Prosecution (Annotated Rules)
§903.07(a) Cross-Referencing Design and Plant Applications — Keep Systematic Notes During Prosecution
This page consolidates and annotates all enforceable requirements under MPEP § 903.07(a), 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.
Cross-Referencing Design and Plant Applications — Keep Systematic Notes During Prosecution
This section addresses Cross-Referencing Design and Plant Applications — Keep Systematic Notes During Prosecution. Contains: 1 requirement and 2 guidance statements.
Key Rules
Statutory Authority for Examination
Access to Patent Application Files (MPEP 101-106)
Each consultation involving a question of the propriety of the classification of subject matter and/or the need for a cross-reference must be recorded in the SEARCH NOTES box on the file wrapper and must include: the name of each examiner consulted, the date that the consultation took place, and the results of the consultation including the consulted examiners’ or examiner’s indication of where claimed subject matter is properly classified and where subject matter disclosed but unclaimed is properly classified and whether or not a cross-reference is needed.
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 § 903.07(a) — Cross-Referencing Design and Plant Applications — Keep Systematic Notes During Prosecution
Source: USPTO903.07(a) Cross-Referencing Design and Plant Applications — Keep Systematic Notes During Prosecution [R-07.2022]
Throughout the examination of a design or plant application, systematic notes should be kept as to cross-references needed either due to claimed or unclaimed disclosure. Examiners handling related subject matter should be consulted during prosecution (whether they handle larger unclaimed combinations or claimed or unclaimed, but disclosed, subcombinations), and asked if cross-references are needed.
Each consultation involving a question of the propriety of the classification of subject matter and/or the need for a cross-reference must be recorded in the SEARCH NOTES box on the file wrapper and must include: the name of each examiner consulted, the date that the consultation took place, and the results of the consultation including the consulted examiners’ or examiner’s indication of where claimed subject matter is properly classified and where subject matter disclosed but unclaimed is properly classified and whether or not a cross-reference is needed.
A cross-reference MUST be provided for all CLAIMED disclosure where possible and inserted in the issuing classification boxes at time of issue.