Patent Law FAQ

This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.

c Expand All C Collapse All

MPEP 2100 – Patentability (2)

If the specification doesn’t provide adequate support or antecedent basis for claim terms, an examiner can take several actions. According to MPEP 2173.03:

“If the specification does not provide the needed support or antecedent basis for the claim terms, the specification should be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).”

The examiner’s actions may include:

  • Objecting to the specification under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1)
  • Requiring the applicant to make appropriate amendments to the description
  • Asking the applicant to amend the claims

The MPEP further states:

“Applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the claim terms provided no new matter is introduced, or amend the claim.”

It’s important to note that any amendments to the specification must not introduce new matter, as this would violate 35 U.S.C. 132(a).

To learn more:

Yes, patent examiners can and often do suggest amendments to claims to address written description issues. This practice is encouraged as part of the examination process to help applicants overcome rejections and move their applications forward.

The MPEP 2163.04 states:

“When appropriate, suggest amendments to the claims which can be supported by the application’s written description, being mindful of the prohibition against the addition of new matter in the claims or description.”

However, examiners must be careful not to suggest amendments that would introduce new matter into the application. Any suggested amendments must be fully supported by the original disclosure to comply with the written description requirement and avoid new matter issues.

This guidance encourages a collaborative approach between examiners and applicants to resolve written description issues while maintaining the integrity of the patent application.

To learn more:

MPEP 2163.04 – Burden On The Examiner With Regard To The Written Description Requirement (1)

Yes, patent examiners can and often do suggest amendments to claims to address written description issues. This practice is encouraged as part of the examination process to help applicants overcome rejections and move their applications forward.

The MPEP 2163.04 states:

“When appropriate, suggest amendments to the claims which can be supported by the application’s written description, being mindful of the prohibition against the addition of new matter in the claims or description.”

However, examiners must be careful not to suggest amendments that would introduce new matter into the application. Any suggested amendments must be fully supported by the original disclosure to comply with the written description requirement and avoid new matter issues.

This guidance encourages a collaborative approach between examiners and applicants to resolve written description issues while maintaining the integrity of the patent application.

To learn more:

MPEP 2173.03 – Correspondence Between Specification And Claims (1)

If the specification doesn’t provide adequate support or antecedent basis for claim terms, an examiner can take several actions. According to MPEP 2173.03:

“If the specification does not provide the needed support or antecedent basis for the claim terms, the specification should be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).”

The examiner’s actions may include:

  • Objecting to the specification under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1)
  • Requiring the applicant to make appropriate amendments to the description
  • Asking the applicant to amend the claims

The MPEP further states:

“Applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the claim terms provided no new matter is introduced, or amend the claim.”

It’s important to note that any amendments to the specification must not introduce new matter, as this would violate 35 U.S.C. 132(a).

To learn more:

Patent Law (2)

If the specification doesn’t provide adequate support or antecedent basis for claim terms, an examiner can take several actions. According to MPEP 2173.03:

“If the specification does not provide the needed support or antecedent basis for the claim terms, the specification should be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).”

The examiner’s actions may include:

  • Objecting to the specification under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1)
  • Requiring the applicant to make appropriate amendments to the description
  • Asking the applicant to amend the claims

The MPEP further states:

“Applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the claim terms provided no new matter is introduced, or amend the claim.”

It’s important to note that any amendments to the specification must not introduce new matter, as this would violate 35 U.S.C. 132(a).

To learn more:

Yes, patent examiners can and often do suggest amendments to claims to address written description issues. This practice is encouraged as part of the examination process to help applicants overcome rejections and move their applications forward.

The MPEP 2163.04 states:

“When appropriate, suggest amendments to the claims which can be supported by the application’s written description, being mindful of the prohibition against the addition of new matter in the claims or description.”

However, examiners must be careful not to suggest amendments that would introduce new matter into the application. Any suggested amendments must be fully supported by the original disclosure to comply with the written description requirement and avoid new matter issues.

This guidance encourages a collaborative approach between examiners and applicants to resolve written description issues while maintaining the integrity of the patent application.

To learn more:

Patent Procedure (2)

If the specification doesn’t provide adequate support or antecedent basis for claim terms, an examiner can take several actions. According to MPEP 2173.03:

“If the specification does not provide the needed support or antecedent basis for the claim terms, the specification should be objected to under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1).”

The examiner’s actions may include:

  • Objecting to the specification under 37 CFR 1.75(d)(1)
  • Requiring the applicant to make appropriate amendments to the description
  • Asking the applicant to amend the claims

The MPEP further states:

“Applicant will be required to make appropriate amendment to the description to provide clear support or antecedent basis for the claim terms provided no new matter is introduced, or amend the claim.”

It’s important to note that any amendments to the specification must not introduce new matter, as this would violate 35 U.S.C. 132(a).

To learn more:

Yes, patent examiners can and often do suggest amendments to claims to address written description issues. This practice is encouraged as part of the examination process to help applicants overcome rejections and move their applications forward.

The MPEP 2163.04 states:

“When appropriate, suggest amendments to the claims which can be supported by the application’s written description, being mindful of the prohibition against the addition of new matter in the claims or description.”

However, examiners must be careful not to suggest amendments that would introduce new matter into the application. Any suggested amendments must be fully supported by the original disclosure to comply with the written description requirement and avoid new matter issues.

This guidance encourages a collaborative approach between examiners and applicants to resolve written description issues while maintaining the integrity of the patent application.

To learn more: