MPEP § 1214.07 — Reopening of Prosecution (Annotated Rules)

§1214.07 Reopening of Prosecution

USPTO MPEP version: BlueIron's Update: 2025-12-31

This page consolidates and annotates all enforceable requirements under MPEP § 1214.07, 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.

Reopening of Prosecution

This section addresses Reopening of Prosecution. Primary authority: 35 U.S.C. 141, 35 U.S.C. 145, and 37 CFR 1.114. Contains: 2 prohibitions, 2 guidance statements, 3 permissions, and 3 other statements.

Key Rules

Topic

Estoppel After Judgment

6 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-952eab44a1c32eb87c73cf68]
RCE Not Applicable to Pre-1995 Utility/Plant Patents or Design Apps
Note:
The RCE practice under 37 CFR 1.114 does not apply to utility or plant patent applications filed before June 8, 1995, or to design applications.

Sometimes an amendment is filed after the Board’s decision which presents a new or amended claim or claims. In view of the fact that prosecution is closed, the appellant is not entitled to have such amendment entered as a matter of right. However, if the amendment is submitted with a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), prosecution of the application will be reopened and the amendment will be entered. See MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection XI. Note that the RCE practice under 37 CFR 1.114 does not apply to utility or plant patent applications filed before June 8, 1995 or to design applications. See 37 CFR 1.114(d) and MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection I. If the amendment obviously places an application in condition for allowance, regardless of whether the amendment is filed with an RCE, the primary examiner should recommend that the amendment be entered, and with the concurrence of the supervisory patent examiner, the amendment will be entered. Note MPEP § 1002.02(d).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.114Estoppel After JudgmentProcessing FeesPTAB Jurisdiction
StatutoryRecommendedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-8f37d57607a6c321c0578f44]
Amendment Placing Application for Allowance Must Be Entered
Note:
If an amendment obviously places the application in condition for allowance, regardless of whether it is filed with an RCE, the primary examiner should recommend and, with supervisory concurrence, enter the amendment.

Sometimes an amendment is filed after the Board’s decision which presents a new or amended claim or claims. In view of the fact that prosecution is closed, the appellant is not entitled to have such amendment entered as a matter of right. However, if the amendment is submitted with a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), prosecution of the application will be reopened and the amendment will be entered. See MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection XI. Note that the RCE practice under 37 CFR 1.114 does not apply to utility or plant patent applications filed before June 8, 1995 or to design applications. See 37 CFR 1.114(d) and MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection I. If the amendment obviously places an application in condition for allowance, regardless of whether the amendment is filed with an RCE, the primary examiner should recommend that the amendment be entered, and with the concurrence of the supervisory patent examiner, the amendment will be entered. Note MPEP § 1002.02(d).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.114Estoppel After JudgmentProcessing FeesPTAB Jurisdiction
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-7f9af0918da36fd6c20692ca]
Amendment After PTAB Final Decision Requires RCE
Note:
An amendment filed after the Board’s decision must be submitted with a request for continued examination (RCE) and the appropriate fee to enter the amendment, unless it obviously places the application in condition for allowance.

Sometimes an amendment is filed after the Board’s decision which presents a new or amended claim or claims. In view of the fact that prosecution is closed, the appellant is not entitled to have such amendment entered as a matter of right. However, if the amendment is submitted with a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), prosecution of the application will be reopened and the amendment will be entered. See MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection XI. Note that the RCE practice under 37 CFR 1.114 does not apply to utility or plant patent applications filed before June 8, 1995 or to design applications. See 37 CFR 1.114(d) and MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection I. If the amendment obviously places an application in condition for allowance, regardless of whether the amendment is filed with an RCE, the primary examiner should recommend that the amendment be entered, and with the concurrence of the supervisory patent examiner, the amendment will be entered. Note MPEP § 1002.02(d).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.114Estoppel After JudgmentProcessing FeesPTAB Jurisdiction
StatutoryProhibitedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-0482c52a544077d0e4a3debc]
Examiner Must Notify Appellant When Amendment Cannot Be Entered
Note:
The examiner must inform the appellant that an amendment cannot be entered and provide the reason for refusal, ensuring it is not arbitrary or capricious.

Where the amendment cannot be entered, the examiner should write to the appellant indicating that the amendment cannot be entered and stating the reason why. The refusal may not be arbitrary or capricious.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.198Estoppel After JudgmentPTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case Procedures
StatutoryProhibitedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-656fdc29c0c5a0712eb782b0]
Refusal Must Not Be Arbitrary
Note:
The examiner's refusal to enter an amendment must be based on valid reasons and not arbitrary or capricious.

Where the amendment cannot be entered, the examiner should write to the appellant indicating that the amendment cannot be entered and stating the reason why. The refusal may not be arbitrary or capricious.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.198Estoppel After JudgmentPTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case Procedures
StatutoryRecommendedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-bfd7a5972c4ae4949c7933dc]
Requirement for Form Paragraph 12.298 Usage
Note:
This rule requires the use of form paragraph 12.298 in reopening prosecution after a final decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

Form paragraph 12.298 should be used:

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.198Estoppel After JudgmentPTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case Procedures
Topic

PTAB Jurisdiction

3 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-14da8c40d8fa08072a676a12]
Form Paragraph Not Allowed After Board Rejection
Note:
This form paragraph must not be used when a 37 CFR 41.50(b) rejection has been made by the Board.

3. This form paragraph is not to be used where a 37 CFR 41.50(b) rejection has been made by the Board.

37 CFR 1.77 · 37 CFR 41.50(b)PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresBoard Decision
StatutoryPermittedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-e13a92445103c5e206b10270]
Petition To Reopen Case When Board Decision Is Based On Overruled Precedent
Note:
A petition to reopen a case can be granted if the Board's decision was based on a practice, rule, law, or precedent that has since been rescinded, repealed, or overruled.

The Director of the USPTO also entertains petitions under 37 CFR 1.198 to reopen certain cases in which an appellant has sought review under 35 U.S.C. 141 or 145. This procedure is restricted to cases which have been decided by the Board and which are amenable to settlement without the need for going forward with the court proceeding. Such petitions will ordinarily be granted only in the following categories of cases:

(C) When the decision of the Board is based on a practice, rule, law, or judicial precedent which, since the Board’s decision, has been rescinded, repealed, or overruled.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.198PTAB JurisdictionEx Parte Appeals to PTABPTAB Contested Case Procedures
StatutoryPermittedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-3cf11da9dc3c977432e2290d]
Proposed Amendments and Evidence to be Entered on Remand
Note:
If the case is remanded, proposed amendments, evidence, and arguments must be entered in the application file for consideration by the Board or examiner.

In the case of an appeal under 35 U.S.C. 141, if the petition is granted, steps will be taken to request the court to remand the case to the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. If so remanded, the proposed amendments, evidence, and arguments will be entered of record in the application file for consideration, and further action will be taken by the Board in the first instance or by the examiner as may be appropriate. In the case of civil action under 35 U.S.C. 145, steps will be taken for obtaining dismissal of the action without prejudice to consideration of the proposals.

Jump to MPEP SourcePTAB JurisdictionEx Parte Appeals to PTABPTAB Contested Case Procedures
Topic

Board Decision Types

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-2ccec7c1da90566787f2aa49]
Proceeding Before Primary Examiner Cannot Be Reopened Without Director’s Authority
Note:
A decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on appeal, once final for judicial review, cannot be reconsidered by the primary examiner unless specifically permitted under §1.114 or §41.50 of this title with written authority from the Director.

When a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on appeal has become final for judicial review, prosecution of the proceeding before the primary examiner will not be reopened or reconsidered by the primary examiner except under the provisions of § 1.114 or § 41.50 of this title without the written authority of the Director,and then only for the consideration of matters not already adjudicated, sufficient cause being shown.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.114Board Decision TypesBoard DecisionEstoppel After Judgment
Topic

Processing Fees

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-7c2718d7e61d8346826b6d09]
Amendment After Board Decision Requires RCE and Fee
Note:
An amendment filed after the Board’s decision must be submitted with a request for continued examination (RCE) and fee to enter the amendment, unless it obviously places the application in condition for allowance.

Sometimes an amendment is filed after the Board’s decision which presents a new or amended claim or claims. In view of the fact that prosecution is closed, the appellant is not entitled to have such amendment entered as a matter of right. However, if the amendment is submitted with a request for continued examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), prosecution of the application will be reopened and the amendment will be entered. See MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection XI. Note that the RCE practice under 37 CFR 1.114 does not apply to utility or plant patent applications filed before June 8, 1995 or to design applications. See 37 CFR 1.114(d) and MPEP § 706.07(h), subsection I. If the amendment obviously places an application in condition for allowance, regardless of whether the amendment is filed with an RCE, the primary examiner should recommend that the amendment be entered, and with the concurrence of the supervisory patent examiner, the amendment will be entered. Note MPEP § 1002.02(d).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.114Processing FeesPTAB JurisdictionFee Requirements
Topic

Examiner Sustained – Amendment Options

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-9753129595a52402de4b00a9]
Technology Center Director Decides Petitions to Reopen After Board Decision
Note:
Petitions under 37 CFR 1.198 to reopen or reconsider prosecution after a Board decision, where no court action has been filed, are decided by the Technology Center Director.

Petitions under 37 CFR 1.198 to reopen or reconsider prosecution of a case after decision by the Board, where no court action has been filed, are decided by the Technology Center Director, MPEP § 1002.02(c).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.198Examiner Sustained – Amendment OptionsProcedure After Board DecisionPTAB Jurisdiction
Topic

Civil Action

1 rules
StatutoryPermittedAlways
[mpep-1214-07-4c0b9a878965503f4217dc5f]
Petition to Reopen Cases After Board Decision
Note:
Allows petitioning to reopen cases decided by the Board under specific conditions, such as curable defects or changed legal precedent.
The Director of the USPTO also entertains petitions under 37 CFR 1.198 to reopen certain cases in which an appellant has sought review under 35 U.S.C. 141 or 145. This procedure is restricted to cases which have been decided by the Board and which are amenable to settlement without the need for going forward with the court proceeding. Such petitions will ordinarily be granted only in the following categories of cases:
  • (A) When the decision of the Board asserts that the rejection of the claims is proper because the claims do not include a disclosed limitation or because they suffer from some other curable defect, and the decision reasonably is suggestive that claims including the limitation or devoid of the defect will be allowable;
  • (B) When the decision of the Board asserts that the rejection of the claims is proper because the record does not include evidence of a specified character, and is reasonably suggestive that if such evidence were presented, the appealed claims would be allowable, and it is demonstrated that such evidence presently exists and can be offered; or
  • (C) When the decision of the Board is based on a practice, rule, law, or judicial precedent which, since the Board’s decision, has been rescinded, repealed, or overruled.
Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 1.198Civil ActionAppeal to Federal CircuitJudicial Review of Board Decisions
Topic

Appeal to Federal Circuit

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-9ad42a5305efdf69cbaeb1e3]
Petition Grant Requires Remand to USPTO for Consideration of Amendments
Note:
If a petition under 35 U.S.C. 141 is granted, the court must request remand of the case to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to consider proposed amendments.

In the case of an appeal under 35 U.S.C. 141, if the petition is granted, steps will be taken to request the court to remand the case to the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. If so remanded, the proposed amendments, evidence, and arguments will be entered of record in the application file for consideration, and further action will be taken by the Board in the first instance or by the examiner as may be appropriate. In the case of civil action under 35 U.S.C. 145, steps will be taken for obtaining dismissal of the action without prejudice to consideration of the proposals.

Jump to MPEP SourceAppeal to Federal CircuitJudicial Review of Board DecisionsEx Parte Appeals to PTAB
Topic

Grounds for Dismissal of Appeal

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-1214-07-0038360ce0eb8ecc0639e03a]
Civil Action Under 35 U.S.C. 145 Can Be Dismissed Without Prejudice to Proposals
Note:
A civil action under 35 U.S.C. 145 can be dismissed without prejudice, allowing proposals to be considered.

In the case of an appeal under 35 U.S.C. 141, if the petition is granted, steps will be taken to request the court to remand the case to the U. S. Patent and Trademark Office. If so remanded, the proposed amendments, evidence, and arguments will be entered of record in the application file for consideration, and further action will be taken by the Board in the first instance or by the examiner as may be appropriate. In the case of civil action under 35 U.S.C. 145, steps will be taken for obtaining dismissal of the action without prejudice to consideration of the proposals.

Jump to MPEP SourceGrounds for Dismissal of AppealCivil ActionAppeal Withdrawal and Dismissal

Examiner Form Paragraphs

Examiner form paragraphs are standard language that you might see in an Office Action or communication from the USPTO. Examiners have latitude to change the form paragraphs, but you will often see this exact language.

¶ 12.298 ¶ 12.298 Amendment After Board Decision, Entry Refused

The amendment filed [1] after a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board is not entered because prosecution is closed. As provided in 37 CFR 1.198 , prosecution of the proceeding before the primary examiner will not be reopened or reconsidered by the primary examiner after a final decision of the Board except under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.114 (request for continued examination) or 37 CFR 41.50 without the written authority of the Director, and then only for the consideration of matters not already adjudicated, sufficient cause being shown.

Citations

Primary topicCitation
Appeal to Federal Circuit
Civil Action
Grounds for Dismissal of Appeal
PTAB Jurisdiction
35 U.S.C. § 141
Appeal to Federal Circuit
Grounds for Dismissal of Appeal
PTAB Jurisdiction
35 U.S.C. § 145
Board Decision Types
Estoppel After Judgment
Processing Fees
37 CFR § 1.114
Estoppel After Judgment
Processing Fees
37 CFR § 1.114(d)
Estoppel After Judgment
Processing Fees
37 CFR § 1.17(e)
Civil Action
Examiner Sustained – Amendment Options
PTAB Jurisdiction
37 CFR § 1.198
Board Decision Types37 CFR § 41.50
PTAB Jurisdiction37 CFR § 41.50(b)
Examiner Sustained – Amendment OptionsMPEP § 1002.02(c)
Estoppel After Judgment
Processing Fees
MPEP § 1002.02(d)
MPEP § 1214.06
Estoppel After Judgment
Processing Fees
MPEP § 706.07(h)
Estoppel After JudgmentForm Paragraph § 12.298

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.

BlueIron Last Updated: 2025-12-31