MPEP § 2307 — Action During an Interference (Annotated Rules)

§2307 Action During an Interference

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

This page consolidates and annotates all enforceable requirements under MPEP § 2307, 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.

Action During an Interference

This section addresses Action During an Interference. Primary authority: 37 CFR 41.103. Contains: 1 prohibition, 2 permissions, and 2 other statements.

Key Rules

Topic

PTAB Jurisdiction

6 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-2307-9eed91e794a05c07a9c20bed]
PTAB Must Have Jurisdiction When Initiating Contested Case
Note:
The Board must have jurisdiction over any involved file when it initiates a contested case, and other proceedings are suspended unless the Board orders otherwise.

The Board acquires jurisdiction over any involved file when the Board initiates a contested case. Other proceedings for the involved file within the Office are suspended except as the Board may order.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.103PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresEx Parte Appeals to PTAB
StatutoryPermittedAlways
[mpep-2307-ee8e25b7cc0d69ad3b80ae2f]
Proceedings Suspended Except as Board Orders
Note:
Other proceedings for the involved file within the Office are suspended except when the Board permits them.

The Board acquires jurisdiction over any involved file when the Board initiates a contested case. Other proceedings for the involved file within the Office are suspended except as the Board may order.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.103PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresEx Parte Appeals to PTAB
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-2307-a5040d0653a36c8aeb8d82d1]
PTAB Has Jurisdiction Over Involved Files During Interference
Note:
The Board has authority to manage and make decisions regarding patents or applications that are involved in an interference, and examiners must act only as authorized by the Board.

Once a patent or application becomes involved in an interference, the Board has jurisdiction over the file. The examiner may not act on an involved patent or application except as the Board may authorize.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.103PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresEx Parte Appeals to PTAB
StatutoryProhibitedAlways
[mpep-2307-b6de37ef36d353a60faaafeb]
Examiner Must Follow Board Authorization During Interference
Note:
The examiner can only act on an involved patent or application with the authorization of the Board during an interference.

Once a patent or application becomes involved in an interference, the Board has jurisdiction over the file. The examiner may not act on an involved patent or application except as the Board may authorize.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.103PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresEx Parte Appeals to PTAB
StatutoryPermittedAlways
[mpep-2307-78dbfa4d938e0cbab991b94b]
Board May Consult Examiner on Technology Issues
Note:
The Board may seek input from the examiner regarding technical aspects of an involved application or patent during an interference proceeding.

The Board may occasionally consult with the examiner, for instance, on a question regarding the technology at issue in an involved application or patent.

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.103PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresEx Parte Appeals to PTAB
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-2307-f250151f5cb8aea32eeecdb0]
PTAB Retains Interference Control Until Final Judgment
Note:
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board maintains authority over an interference until it concludes with a final decision, including any post-judgment review periods.

The Board retains jurisdiction over the interference until the interference is terminated. The Director has defined termination to occur after a final Board judgment in the interference and the period for seeking judicial review has expired or, if judicial review is sought, after completion of judicial review including any further action by the Board. See 37 CFR 41.205(a).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.205(a)PTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case ProceduresEstoppel After Judgment
Topic

Estoppel After Judgment

1 rules
StatutoryInformativeAlways
[mpep-2307-12830dcd6b48b7c65ca131e3]
Termination of Interference After Final Judgment and Review
Note:
The interference is terminated after a final Board judgment and the period for seeking judicial review has expired, or if reviewed, after completion including any further action by the Board.

The Board retains jurisdiction over the interference until the interference is terminated. The Director has defined termination to occur after a final Board judgment in the interference and the period for seeking judicial review has expired or, if judicial review is sought, after completion of judicial review including any further action by the Board. See 37 CFR 41.205(a).

Jump to MPEP Source · 37 CFR 41.205(a)Estoppel After JudgmentPTAB JurisdictionPTAB Contested Case Procedures

Citations

Primary topicCitation
Estoppel After Judgment
PTAB Jurisdiction
37 CFR § 41.205(a)

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