Patent Law FAQ

Access to unpublished patent application files is generally restricted. According to MPEP 103:

‘Unpublished abandoned applications are not open to public inspection.’

However, there are exceptions:

• If the application is referenced in a U.S. patent application publication or patent
• If written authority from the applicant, assignee, or attorney/agent of record is provided
• If a petition for access is granted

To request access, you may need to file a petition with the USPTO, demonstrating a need or right to access the application.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on unpublished applications, visit: unpublished applications.

The duration of a power to inspect granted by an applicant or inventor is generally ongoing until explicitly rescinded. According to MPEP 104:

“An unrestricted power to inspect given by an applicant or inventor is, under existing practice, recognized as in effect until and unless rescinded.”

This means that once granted, a power to inspect remains valid indefinitely unless the grantor takes action to revoke it. However, it’s important to note that this applies to unrestricted powers to inspect granted by applicants or inventors, and different rules may apply to other types of authorizations or parties.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

Access to patent applications for unregistered individuals is granted through a specific process outlined in MPEP 104:

“Unregistered employees of attorneys or agents, public stenographers, and all other persons not within the provisions of paragraphs (A) and (B) above will be given access only upon presentation of a written authorization for access (power to inspect) signed by a person specified in paragraph (A) above, which authorization will be entered as a part of the official file.”

This means that unregistered individuals must present a written authorization, often called a ‘power to inspect,’ signed by an authorized person such as the applicant, inventor, or attorney of record. The authorization must specifically name the person granted access and be limited to a single application. The USPTO provides Form PTO/SB/67 for this purpose.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on power to inspect, visit: power to inspect.

For Image File Wrapper (IFW) applications, the process of granting power to inspect is different. According to MPEP 104:

“Powers to inspect are not accepted in Image File Wrapper (IFW) applications. IFW applications are available through the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system, and pro se applicants and attorneys of record have direct access to the IFW through Private PAIR (when a Customer Number is associated with the correspondence address for the application, and the applicant or attorney has access to Private PAIR for the customer number).”

This means that for IFW applications, access is typically granted through the Private PAIR system, eliminating the need for traditional powers to inspect. If access through Private PAIR is not possible, alternative methods for viewing the application may be necessary.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on power to inspect, visit: power to inspect.

For more information on Private PAIR, visit: Private PAIR.

Yes, the Director of the USPTO has the authority to grant access to patent applications in certain circumstances. According to MPEP 104:

“Access provided upon the written order of the Director will also become a part of the record of the application.”

Additionally, the MPEP states:

“Where an applicant relied on the applicant’s application as a means to interfere with a competitor’s business or customers, permission to inspect the application may be given the competitor by the Director. Such permission is via petition for access under 37 CFR 1.14(i).”

This means that in special cases, particularly where there may be competitive interests at stake, the Director can authorize access to an application. However, this permission is not of a continuing nature and may be subject to reevaluation based on changing circumstances.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on petition for access, visit: petition for access.

If a suspended practitioner is given power to inspect a patent application, the USPTO will not accept it. MPEP 105 clearly states: “Power to inspect given to such an attorney or agent will not be accepted.” This means that even if an applicant or inventor attempts to grant inspection rights to a suspended practitioner, the USPTO will reject this authorization and prevent the suspended practitioner from accessing the application materials.

To learn more:

• Power to Inspect
• Suspended Practitioners
• USPTO Procedures
• Patent Application Access
• Rejection of Authorization

An assignee of the entire interest in a patent application has broader rights regarding inspection compared to a part interest assignee. According to MPEP 106.01, an assignee of the entire interest may inspect the application file wrapper and be granted access to the subject matter of the application. This is because they have acquired all rights to the patent application and are considered to have stepped into the shoes of the inventor(s) for all practical purposes related to the application.

Filing a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) has implications for the confidentiality of the application. As stated in the MPEP:

A CPA is construed to include a waiver of confidentiality by the applicant under 35 U.S.C. 122 to the extent that any member of the public who is entitled under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.14 to obtain access to, copies of, or information concerning either the prior application or any continuing application filed under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.53(d) may be given similar access to, copies of, or similar information concerning, the other application(s) in the application file.

This means:

• The CPA is treated as a waiver of confidentiality for the prior application
• Members of the public who have access to the CPA may also be given access to the prior application
• This applies to all applications in the chain of CPAs

Applicants should consider this loss of confidentiality when deciding whether to file a CPA or a new application under 37 CFR 1.53(b).

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on public information, visit: public information.

Filing a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) has implications for the confidentiality of the application. As stated in the MPEP:

A CPA is construed to include a waiver of confidentiality by the applicant under 35 U.S.C. 122 to the extent that any member of the public who is entitled under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.14 to obtain access to, copies of, or information concerning either the prior application or any continuing application filed under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.53(d) may be given similar access to, copies of, or similar information concerning, the other application(s) in the application file.

This means:

• The CPA is treated as a waiver of confidentiality for the prior application
• Members of the public who have access to the CPA may also be given access to the prior application
• This applies to all applications in the chain of CPAs

Applicants should consider this loss of confidentiality when deciding whether to file a CPA or a new application under 37 CFR 1.53(b).

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on public information, visit: public information.

An assignee of the entire interest in a patent application has broader rights regarding inspection compared to a part interest assignee. According to MPEP 106.01, an assignee of the entire interest may inspect the application file wrapper and be granted access to the subject matter of the application. This is because they have acquired all rights to the patent application and are considered to have stepped into the shoes of the inventor(s) for all practical purposes related to the application.

The duration of a power to inspect granted by an applicant or inventor is generally ongoing until explicitly rescinded. According to MPEP 104:

“An unrestricted power to inspect given by an applicant or inventor is, under existing practice, recognized as in effect until and unless rescinded.”

This means that once granted, a power to inspect remains valid indefinitely unless the grantor takes action to revoke it. However, it’s important to note that this applies to unrestricted powers to inspect granted by applicants or inventors, and different rules may apply to other types of authorizations or parties.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

If a suspended practitioner is given power to inspect a patent application, the USPTO will not accept it. MPEP 105 clearly states: “Power to inspect given to such an attorney or agent will not be accepted.” This means that even if an applicant or inventor attempts to grant inspection rights to a suspended practitioner, the USPTO will reject this authorization and prevent the suspended practitioner from accessing the application materials.

To learn more:

• Power to Inspect
• Suspended Practitioners
• USPTO Procedures
• Patent Application Access
• Rejection of Authorization

Access to patent applications for unregistered individuals is granted through a specific process outlined in MPEP 104:

“Unregistered employees of attorneys or agents, public stenographers, and all other persons not within the provisions of paragraphs (A) and (B) above will be given access only upon presentation of a written authorization for access (power to inspect) signed by a person specified in paragraph (A) above, which authorization will be entered as a part of the official file.”

This means that unregistered individuals must present a written authorization, often called a ‘power to inspect,’ signed by an authorized person such as the applicant, inventor, or attorney of record. The authorization must specifically name the person granted access and be limited to a single application. The USPTO provides Form PTO/SB/67 for this purpose.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on power to inspect, visit: power to inspect.

Filing a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) has implications for the confidentiality of the application. As stated in the MPEP:

A CPA is construed to include a waiver of confidentiality by the applicant under 35 U.S.C. 122 to the extent that any member of the public who is entitled under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.14 to obtain access to, copies of, or information concerning either the prior application or any continuing application filed under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.53(d) may be given similar access to, copies of, or similar information concerning, the other application(s) in the application file.

This means:

• The CPA is treated as a waiver of confidentiality for the prior application
• Members of the public who have access to the CPA may also be given access to the prior application
• This applies to all applications in the chain of CPAs

Applicants should consider this loss of confidentiality when deciding whether to file a CPA or a new application under 37 CFR 1.53(b).

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on public information, visit: public information.

Access to unpublished patent application files is generally restricted. According to MPEP 103:

‘Unpublished abandoned applications are not open to public inspection.’

However, there are exceptions:

• If the application is referenced in a U.S. patent application publication or patent
• If written authority from the applicant, assignee, or attorney/agent of record is provided
• If a petition for access is granted

To request access, you may need to file a petition with the USPTO, demonstrating a need or right to access the application.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on unpublished applications, visit: unpublished applications.

For Image File Wrapper (IFW) applications, the process of granting power to inspect is different. According to MPEP 104:

“Powers to inspect are not accepted in Image File Wrapper (IFW) applications. IFW applications are available through the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system, and pro se applicants and attorneys of record have direct access to the IFW through Private PAIR (when a Customer Number is associated with the correspondence address for the application, and the applicant or attorney has access to Private PAIR for the customer number).”

This means that for IFW applications, access is typically granted through the Private PAIR system, eliminating the need for traditional powers to inspect. If access through Private PAIR is not possible, alternative methods for viewing the application may be necessary.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on power to inspect, visit: power to inspect.

For more information on Private PAIR, visit: Private PAIR.

Yes, the Director of the USPTO has the authority to grant access to patent applications in certain circumstances. According to MPEP 104:

“Access provided upon the written order of the Director will also become a part of the record of the application.”

Additionally, the MPEP states:

“Where an applicant relied on the applicant’s application as a means to interfere with a competitor’s business or customers, permission to inspect the application may be given the competitor by the Director. Such permission is via petition for access under 37 CFR 1.14(i).”

This means that in special cases, particularly where there may be competitive interests at stake, the Director can authorize access to an application. However, this permission is not of a continuing nature and may be subject to reevaluation based on changing circumstances.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on petition for access, visit: petition for access.

An assignee of the entire interest in a patent application has broader rights regarding inspection compared to a part interest assignee. According to MPEP 106.01, an assignee of the entire interest may inspect the application file wrapper and be granted access to the subject matter of the application. This is because they have acquired all rights to the patent application and are considered to have stepped into the shoes of the inventor(s) for all practical purposes related to the application.

The duration of a power to inspect granted by an applicant or inventor is generally ongoing until explicitly rescinded. According to MPEP 104:

“An unrestricted power to inspect given by an applicant or inventor is, under existing practice, recognized as in effect until and unless rescinded.”

This means that once granted, a power to inspect remains valid indefinitely unless the grantor takes action to revoke it. However, it’s important to note that this applies to unrestricted powers to inspect granted by applicants or inventors, and different rules may apply to other types of authorizations or parties.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

If a suspended practitioner is given power to inspect a patent application, the USPTO will not accept it. MPEP 105 clearly states: “Power to inspect given to such an attorney or agent will not be accepted.” This means that even if an applicant or inventor attempts to grant inspection rights to a suspended practitioner, the USPTO will reject this authorization and prevent the suspended practitioner from accessing the application materials.

To learn more:

• Power to Inspect
• Suspended Practitioners
• USPTO Procedures
• Patent Application Access
• Rejection of Authorization

Access to patent applications for unregistered individuals is granted through a specific process outlined in MPEP 104:

“Unregistered employees of attorneys or agents, public stenographers, and all other persons not within the provisions of paragraphs (A) and (B) above will be given access only upon presentation of a written authorization for access (power to inspect) signed by a person specified in paragraph (A) above, which authorization will be entered as a part of the official file.”

This means that unregistered individuals must present a written authorization, often called a ‘power to inspect,’ signed by an authorized person such as the applicant, inventor, or attorney of record. The authorization must specifically name the person granted access and be limited to a single application. The USPTO provides Form PTO/SB/67 for this purpose.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on power to inspect, visit: power to inspect.

Filing a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) has implications for the confidentiality of the application. As stated in the MPEP:

A CPA is construed to include a waiver of confidentiality by the applicant under 35 U.S.C. 122 to the extent that any member of the public who is entitled under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.14 to obtain access to, copies of, or information concerning either the prior application or any continuing application filed under the provisions of 37 CFR 1.53(d) may be given similar access to, copies of, or similar information concerning, the other application(s) in the application file.

This means:

• The CPA is treated as a waiver of confidentiality for the prior application
• Members of the public who have access to the CPA may also be given access to the prior application
• This applies to all applications in the chain of CPAs

Applicants should consider this loss of confidentiality when deciding whether to file a CPA or a new application under 37 CFR 1.53(b).

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on public information, visit: public information.

Access to unpublished patent application files is generally restricted. According to MPEP 103:

‘Unpublished abandoned applications are not open to public inspection.’

However, there are exceptions:

• If the application is referenced in a U.S. patent application publication or patent
• If written authority from the applicant, assignee, or attorney/agent of record is provided
• If a petition for access is granted

To request access, you may need to file a petition with the USPTO, demonstrating a need or right to access the application.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on unpublished applications, visit: unpublished applications.

For Image File Wrapper (IFW) applications, the process of granting power to inspect is different. According to MPEP 104:

“Powers to inspect are not accepted in Image File Wrapper (IFW) applications. IFW applications are available through the Private Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system, and pro se applicants and attorneys of record have direct access to the IFW through Private PAIR (when a Customer Number is associated with the correspondence address for the application, and the applicant or attorney has access to Private PAIR for the customer number).”

This means that for IFW applications, access is typically granted through the Private PAIR system, eliminating the need for traditional powers to inspect. If access through Private PAIR is not possible, alternative methods for viewing the application may be necessary.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on power to inspect, visit: power to inspect.

For more information on Private PAIR, visit: Private PAIR.

Yes, the Director of the USPTO has the authority to grant access to patent applications in certain circumstances. According to MPEP 104:

“Access provided upon the written order of the Director will also become a part of the record of the application.”

Additionally, the MPEP states:

“Where an applicant relied on the applicant’s application as a means to interfere with a competitor’s business or customers, permission to inspect the application may be given the competitor by the Director. Such permission is via petition for access under 37 CFR 1.14(i).”

This means that in special cases, particularly where there may be competitive interests at stake, the Director can authorize access to an application. However, this permission is not of a continuing nature and may be subject to reevaluation based on changing circumstances.

For more information on Patent application access, visit: Patent application access.

For more information on petition for access, visit: petition for access.