Patent Law FAQ

The ‘statement of unintentional delay’ is a crucial component of a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed priority claim. According to MPEP 214.02:

The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.

This statement must affirm that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional. It’s important to note that:

• The USPTO requires an additional explanation of the circumstances surrounding the delay that establishes the entire delay was unintentional.
• The statement must be signed by a person who has sufficient knowledge of the facts to support the statement.
• Providing an inadequate or insufficient explanation may lead to a request for further information, which could delay the petition process.

Applicants should be prepared to provide a detailed account of the circumstances that led to the delay, ensuring that it covers the entire period of delay and demonstrates that the delay was truly unintentional.

To learn more:

• statement of unintentional delay
• delayed priority claim
• petition
• MPEP 214.02

To learn more:

• MPEP 214.02

Yes, an abandoned application can still be used as a priority document for subsequent applications, provided that the priority claim is made within the specified time limits. The abandoned status of the earlier application does not affect its ability to serve as a basis for priority. For more information on priority claims, refer to MPEP 201 and MPEP 211.

Under 37 CFR 1.55(i), the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application will be considered satisfied if:

1. The foreign application was filed in a foreign intellectual property office participating with the USPTO in a bilateral or multilateral priority document exchange agreement;
2. The claim for priority is presented in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application and including the information necessary for the participating foreign office to provide the USPTO with access to the foreign application; and
3. The copy of the foreign application is received by the USPTO from the participating foreign office, or a certified copy is filed, within the time period specified in 37 CFR 1.55(g)(1).

In addition, if the foreign application was not filed in a participating office directly, but a certified copy was filed in an application subsequently filed in a participating office that permits the USPTO to obtain a copy, the applicant must also file a request in a separate document that the USPTO obtain a copy of the foreign application from the participating office. See MPEP 215.01.

Yes, an abandoned application can still be used as a priority document for subsequent applications, provided that the priority claim is made within the specified time limits. The abandoned status of the earlier application does not affect its ability to serve as a basis for priority. For more information on priority claims, refer to MPEP 201 and MPEP 211.

Under 37 CFR 1.55(i), the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application will be considered satisfied if:

1. The foreign application was filed in a foreign intellectual property office participating with the USPTO in a bilateral or multilateral priority document exchange agreement;
2. The claim for priority is presented in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application and including the information necessary for the participating foreign office to provide the USPTO with access to the foreign application; and
3. The copy of the foreign application is received by the USPTO from the participating foreign office, or a certified copy is filed, within the time period specified in 37 CFR 1.55(g)(1).

In addition, if the foreign application was not filed in a participating office directly, but a certified copy was filed in an application subsequently filed in a participating office that permits the USPTO to obtain a copy, the applicant must also file a request in a separate document that the USPTO obtain a copy of the foreign application from the participating office. See MPEP 215.01.

Yes, an abandoned application can still be used as a priority document for subsequent applications, provided that the priority claim is made within the specified time limits. The abandoned status of the earlier application does not affect its ability to serve as a basis for priority. For more information on priority claims, refer to MPEP 201 and MPEP 211.

The ‘statement of unintentional delay’ is a crucial component of a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed priority claim. According to MPEP 214.02:

The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.

This statement must affirm that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional. It’s important to note that:

• The USPTO requires an additional explanation of the circumstances surrounding the delay that establishes the entire delay was unintentional.
• The statement must be signed by a person who has sufficient knowledge of the facts to support the statement.
• Providing an inadequate or insufficient explanation may lead to a request for further information, which could delay the petition process.

Applicants should be prepared to provide a detailed account of the circumstances that led to the delay, ensuring that it covers the entire period of delay and demonstrates that the delay was truly unintentional.

To learn more:

• statement of unintentional delay
• delayed priority claim
• petition
• MPEP 214.02

To learn more:

• MPEP 214.02

Under 37 CFR 1.55(i), the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application will be considered satisfied if:

1. The foreign application was filed in a foreign intellectual property office participating with the USPTO in a bilateral or multilateral priority document exchange agreement;
2. The claim for priority is presented in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application and including the information necessary for the participating foreign office to provide the USPTO with access to the foreign application; and
3. The copy of the foreign application is received by the USPTO from the participating foreign office, or a certified copy is filed, within the time period specified in 37 CFR 1.55(g)(1).

In addition, if the foreign application was not filed in a participating office directly, but a certified copy was filed in an application subsequently filed in a participating office that permits the USPTO to obtain a copy, the applicant must also file a request in a separate document that the USPTO obtain a copy of the foreign application from the participating office. See MPEP 215.01.

Yes, an abandoned application can still be used as a priority document for subsequent applications, provided that the priority claim is made within the specified time limits. The abandoned status of the earlier application does not affect its ability to serve as a basis for priority. For more information on priority claims, refer to MPEP 201 and MPEP 211.

The ‘statement of unintentional delay’ is a crucial component of a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed priority claim. According to MPEP 214.02:

The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.

This statement must affirm that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional. It’s important to note that:

• The USPTO requires an additional explanation of the circumstances surrounding the delay that establishes the entire delay was unintentional.
• The statement must be signed by a person who has sufficient knowledge of the facts to support the statement.
• Providing an inadequate or insufficient explanation may lead to a request for further information, which could delay the petition process.

Applicants should be prepared to provide a detailed account of the circumstances that led to the delay, ensuring that it covers the entire period of delay and demonstrates that the delay was truly unintentional.

To learn more:

• statement of unintentional delay
• delayed priority claim
• petition
• MPEP 214.02

To learn more:

• MPEP 214.02

Under 37 CFR 1.55(i), the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application will be considered satisfied if:

1. The foreign application was filed in a foreign intellectual property office participating with the USPTO in a bilateral or multilateral priority document exchange agreement;
2. The claim for priority is presented in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application and including the information necessary for the participating foreign office to provide the USPTO with access to the foreign application; and
3. The copy of the foreign application is received by the USPTO from the participating foreign office, or a certified copy is filed, within the time period specified in 37 CFR 1.55(g)(1).

In addition, if the foreign application was not filed in a participating office directly, but a certified copy was filed in an application subsequently filed in a participating office that permits the USPTO to obtain a copy, the applicant must also file a request in a separate document that the USPTO obtain a copy of the foreign application from the participating office. See MPEP 215.01.