MPEP § 2308.03(b) — No Interference-in-Fact (Annotated Rules)
§2308.03(b) No Interference-in-Fact
This page consolidates and annotates all enforceable requirements under MPEP § 2308.03(b), 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.
No Interference-in-Fact
This section addresses No Interference-in-Fact.
Key Rules
Estoppel After Judgment
A judgment of no interference-in-fact means that no interference is needed to resolve priority between the parties. Neither party has lost the interference for the purpose of estoppel consistent with 37 CFR 41.127(a)(1), even if one of the parties suggested the interference.
A judgment of no interference-in-fact means that no interference is needed to resolve priority between the parties. Neither party has lost the interference for the purpose of estoppel consistent with 37 CFR 41.127(a)(1), even if one of the parties suggested the interference.
Citations
| Primary topic | Citation |
|---|---|
| Estoppel After Judgment | 37 CFR § 41.127(a)(1) |
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 § 2308.03(b) — No Interference-in-Fact
Source: USPTO2308.03(b) No Interference-in-Fact [R-08.2012]
A judgment of no interference-in-fact means that no interference is needed to resolve priority between the parties. Neither party has lost the interference for the purpose of estoppel consistent with 37 CFR 41.127(a)(1), even if one of the parties suggested the interference.
A judgment of no interference-in-fact bars any further interference between the same parties for claims to the same invention as the count of the interference.