Patent Law FAQ

The distinction between unintentional and intentional delay is crucial when filing a delayed benefit claim. The MPEP 211.04 addresses this:

‘A petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) for the benefit of a prior-filed application must be accompanied by: … (3) A statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(d)(3) and the date the benefit claim was filed was unintentional.’

An unintentional delay may be caused by oversight, administrative error, or other circumstances not intended to delay the filing. Intentional delay, on the other hand, implies a deliberate choice not to file the benefit claim on time. Only unintentional delays can be remedied through a petition. Intentional delays are not excusable and will result in the denial of the delayed benefit claim.

To learn more:

• unintentional delay
• intentional delay
• delayed benefit claim
• petition requirements

A petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include several elements. According to MPEP 211.01(a):

‘A petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b) requires: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application, which must be included in application data sheet (unless previously submitted in an application data sheet); (B) the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the delay in filing the nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(1)(i) was unintentional.’

The petition must be filed in the subsequent application (nonprovisional or international application designating the US) within 14 months of the provisional application’s filing date. The USPTO may require additional information to verify that the delay was unintentional.

For more information on benefit restoration, visit: benefit restoration.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

According to MPEP 211, a petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include:

1. The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application (unless previously submitted)
2. The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m)
3. A statement that the delay in filing the subsequent nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period was unintentional

The MPEP further states:

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

It’s important to note that this petition must be filed in the subsequent application, not the provisional application itself.

For more information on patent procedure, visit: patent procedure.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

To file a delayed priority claim, you must submit a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority. According to 37 CFR 1.55(e), the petition must include:

1. The priority claim in an application data sheet
2. A certified copy of the foreign application (unless exceptions apply)
3. The petition fee
4. A statement that the entire delay was unintentional

The MPEP states: A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim […]; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application […]; (3) The petition fee […]; and (4) A statement that the entire delay […] was unintentional.

Filing a delayed benefit claim for a provisional application requires specific components. MPEP 211.04 outlines the requirements:

The petition must be accompanied by: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior provisional application (unless previously submitted); (B) a petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the claim was filed was unintentional.

For petitions filed more than two years after the due date, additional explanation of the delay circumstances is required to establish that the entire delay was unintentional.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

A petition to restore the right of priority must include several key elements. The MPEP outlines these requirements:

A petition to restore the right of priority must include: (1) the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing (unless previously submitted); (2) the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (3) a statement that the delay in filing the subsequent application within the twelve-month period was unintentional.

These requirements ensure that the USPTO has all necessary information to consider your petition for priority restoration.

For more information on application data sheet, visit: application data sheet.

For more information on petition fee, visit: petition fee.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on priority restoration, visit: priority restoration.

According to MPEP 214.02, a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority requires the following:

• The priority claim: This must be submitted in an application data sheet (ADS) as required by 35 U.S.C. 119(b), unless previously submitted.
• The petition fee: As set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
• A statement of unintentional delay: A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP states: ‘The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.’ This means that in some cases, additional documentation may be required to support the claim of unintentional delay.

It’s important to note that these requirements apply to priority claims under various statutes, including 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), 386(a), 365(c), 119(e), 120, and 121.

To learn more:

• unintentionally delayed priority claim
• petition requirements
• ADS
• petition fee
• unintentional delay statement

To learn more:

• delayed priority claim
• foreign priority
• patent application

The USPTO handles unintentionally delayed domestic benefit claims similarly to foreign priority claims, but with some specific provisions. According to MPEP 214.02:

‘For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, the specific reference to the prior application must be included in an application data sheet (37 CFR 1.76). For applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, the specific reference to the prior application must be in the first sentence(s) of the specification or in an application data sheet.’

For domestic benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c), a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim must include:

• The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed application, unless previously submitted;
• The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and
• A statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the benefit claim was filed was unintentional.

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

To learn more:

• unintentionally delayed domestic benefit claim
• petition requirements
• ADS
• petition fee
• unintentional delay statement

If you submitted the reference to the prior application within the required time period but in the wrong location, you may not need to file a petition. The MPEP provides guidance on this situation:

If the reference to the prior application was previously submitted within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78 but was not included in the location in the application required by the rule (e.g., if the reference was submitted in an oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter), and the information concerning the benefit claim was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on the first filing receipt, the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 and the petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m) are not required. (MPEP § 211)

However, you are still required to submit the reference in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78. This means:

• For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: File an ADS in compliance with 37 CFR 1.76 with the reference.
• For applications filed before September 16, 2012: File either an amendment to the first sentence(s) of the specification or an ADS in compliance with pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.76.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

The requirements for accepting an unintentionally delayed claim for foreign priority include:

1. Filing a petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b).
2. Submitting the priority claim in an application data sheet identifying the foreign application.
3. Providing a certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception applies.
4. Paying the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
5. Submitting a statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date it was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP cites 37 CFR 1.55(e), which states: “A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) in an application data sheet (§ 1.76(b)(6)), identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing, unless previously submitted; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception in paragraph (h), (i), or (j) of this section applies; (3) The petition fee as set forth in § 1.17(m); and (4) A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due under this section and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.” (37 CFR 1.55(e))

A petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include several elements. According to MPEP 211.01(a):

‘A petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b) requires: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application, which must be included in application data sheet (unless previously submitted in an application data sheet); (B) the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the delay in filing the nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(1)(i) was unintentional.’

The petition must be filed in the subsequent application (nonprovisional or international application designating the US) within 14 months of the provisional application’s filing date. The USPTO may require additional information to verify that the delay was unintentional.

For more information on benefit restoration, visit: benefit restoration.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

According to MPEP 211, a petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include:

1. The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application (unless previously submitted)
2. The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m)
3. A statement that the delay in filing the subsequent nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period was unintentional

The MPEP further states:

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

It’s important to note that this petition must be filed in the subsequent application, not the provisional application itself.

For more information on patent procedure, visit: patent procedure.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

Filing a delayed benefit claim for a provisional application requires specific components. MPEP 211.04 outlines the requirements:

The petition must be accompanied by: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior provisional application (unless previously submitted); (B) a petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the claim was filed was unintentional.

For petitions filed more than two years after the due date, additional explanation of the delay circumstances is required to establish that the entire delay was unintentional.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

If you submitted the reference to the prior application within the required time period but in the wrong location, you may not need to file a petition. The MPEP provides guidance on this situation:

If the reference to the prior application was previously submitted within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78 but was not included in the location in the application required by the rule (e.g., if the reference was submitted in an oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter), and the information concerning the benefit claim was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on the first filing receipt, the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 and the petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m) are not required. (MPEP § 211)

However, you are still required to submit the reference in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78. This means:

• For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: File an ADS in compliance with 37 CFR 1.76 with the reference.
• For applications filed before September 16, 2012: File either an amendment to the first sentence(s) of the specification or an ADS in compliance with pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.76.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

A petition to restore the right of priority must include several key elements. The MPEP outlines these requirements:

A petition to restore the right of priority must include: (1) the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing (unless previously submitted); (2) the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (3) a statement that the delay in filing the subsequent application within the twelve-month period was unintentional.

These requirements ensure that the USPTO has all necessary information to consider your petition for priority restoration.

For more information on application data sheet, visit: application data sheet.

For more information on petition fee, visit: petition fee.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on priority restoration, visit: priority restoration.

To file a delayed priority claim, you must submit a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority. According to 37 CFR 1.55(e), the petition must include:

1. The priority claim in an application data sheet
2. A certified copy of the foreign application (unless exceptions apply)
3. The petition fee
4. A statement that the entire delay was unintentional

The MPEP states: A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim […]; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application […]; (3) The petition fee […]; and (4) A statement that the entire delay […] was unintentional.

The requirements for accepting an unintentionally delayed claim for foreign priority include:

1. Filing a petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b).
2. Submitting the priority claim in an application data sheet identifying the foreign application.
3. Providing a certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception applies.
4. Paying the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
5. Submitting a statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date it was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP cites 37 CFR 1.55(e), which states: “A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) in an application data sheet (§ 1.76(b)(6)), identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing, unless previously submitted; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception in paragraph (h), (i), or (j) of this section applies; (3) The petition fee as set forth in § 1.17(m); and (4) A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due under this section and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.” (37 CFR 1.55(e))

To expunge an assignment record at the USPTO, clear evidence must be provided that the document was submitted by mistake or is of improper character. The MPEP 323.01(d) states:

‘The USPTO will not expunge any assignment records that have been recorded absent a petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1.59.’

While the MPEP doesn’t provide specific examples of acceptable evidence, it generally includes:

• Documentation showing the assignment was recorded in error
• Proof that the assignment document contains incorrect information
• Evidence that the assignment was not intended for the specific application or patent

The burden of proof lies with the petitioner to demonstrate why the assignment record should be expunged. Each case is evaluated on its own merits by the USPTO.

To learn more:

• assignment records
• expungement evidence
• USPTO
• petition requirements

Yes, assignment records can be expunged after they have been recorded by the USPTO, but only through a specific petition process. According to MPEP 323.01(d):

‘The USPTO will not expunge any assignment records that have been recorded absent a petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1.59.’

This means that once an assignment record has been officially recorded, it cannot be simply removed or deleted. A formal petition must be filed, demonstrating that the document was submitted by mistake or is of improper character. The USPTO will then review the petition and make a determination on whether to expunge the record.

To learn more:

• recorded assignments
• expungement
• USPTO
• petition requirements

If the last-known address of an unavailable inventor is invalid, the petitioner must make a diligent effort to find a valid address. According to MPEP 409.03(b):

‘If the last known address of the nonsigning inventor(s) is invalid, petitioner must state what efforts were made to find a current address.’

This means the petitioner should document their attempts to locate the inventor, which may include searching public records, contacting former employers, or using people-finding services. If all efforts fail, this should be clearly stated in the petition.

To learn more:

• inventor address
• diligent effort
• petition requirements

Yes, a petition under 37 CFR 1.47(a) can be filed for multiple unavailable inventors. The MPEP 409.03(b) states:

‘Where there are joint inventors, each nonsigning inventor must be petitioned for separately, even if more than one nonsigning inventor is unavailable.’

This means that while a single petition can cover multiple unavailable inventors, the petition must address each inventor individually, providing specific information and evidence for each one’s unavailability.

To learn more:

• multiple inventors
• 37 CFR 1.47(a)
• petition requirements

To learn more:

• 37 CFR 1.47(a)

The distinction between unintentional and intentional delay is crucial when filing a delayed benefit claim. The MPEP 211.04 addresses this:

‘A petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) for the benefit of a prior-filed application must be accompanied by: … (3) A statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(d)(3) and the date the benefit claim was filed was unintentional.’

An unintentional delay may be caused by oversight, administrative error, or other circumstances not intended to delay the filing. Intentional delay, on the other hand, implies a deliberate choice not to file the benefit claim on time. Only unintentional delays can be remedied through a petition. Intentional delays are not excusable and will result in the denial of the delayed benefit claim.

To learn more:

• unintentional delay
• intentional delay
• delayed benefit claim
• petition requirements

A petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include several elements. According to MPEP 211.01(a):

‘A petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b) requires: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application, which must be included in application data sheet (unless previously submitted in an application data sheet); (B) the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the delay in filing the nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(1)(i) was unintentional.’

The petition must be filed in the subsequent application (nonprovisional or international application designating the US) within 14 months of the provisional application’s filing date. The USPTO may require additional information to verify that the delay was unintentional.

For more information on benefit restoration, visit: benefit restoration.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

If the last-known address of an unavailable inventor is invalid, the petitioner must make a diligent effort to find a valid address. According to MPEP 409.03(b):

‘If the last known address of the nonsigning inventor(s) is invalid, petitioner must state what efforts were made to find a current address.’

This means the petitioner should document their attempts to locate the inventor, which may include searching public records, contacting former employers, or using people-finding services. If all efforts fail, this should be clearly stated in the petition.

To learn more:

• inventor address
• diligent effort
• petition requirements

To expunge an assignment record at the USPTO, clear evidence must be provided that the document was submitted by mistake or is of improper character. The MPEP 323.01(d) states:

‘The USPTO will not expunge any assignment records that have been recorded absent a petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1.59.’

While the MPEP doesn’t provide specific examples of acceptable evidence, it generally includes:

• Documentation showing the assignment was recorded in error
• Proof that the assignment document contains incorrect information
• Evidence that the assignment was not intended for the specific application or patent

The burden of proof lies with the petitioner to demonstrate why the assignment record should be expunged. Each case is evaluated on its own merits by the USPTO.

To learn more:

• assignment records
• expungement evidence
• USPTO
• petition requirements

According to MPEP 211, a petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include:

1. The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application (unless previously submitted)
2. The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m)
3. A statement that the delay in filing the subsequent nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period was unintentional

The MPEP further states:

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

It’s important to note that this petition must be filed in the subsequent application, not the provisional application itself.

For more information on patent procedure, visit: patent procedure.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

To file a delayed priority claim, you must submit a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority. According to 37 CFR 1.55(e), the petition must include:

1. The priority claim in an application data sheet
2. A certified copy of the foreign application (unless exceptions apply)
3. The petition fee
4. A statement that the entire delay was unintentional

The MPEP states: A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim […]; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application […]; (3) The petition fee […]; and (4) A statement that the entire delay […] was unintentional.

Filing a delayed benefit claim for a provisional application requires specific components. MPEP 211.04 outlines the requirements:

The petition must be accompanied by: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior provisional application (unless previously submitted); (B) a petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the claim was filed was unintentional.

For petitions filed more than two years after the due date, additional explanation of the delay circumstances is required to establish that the entire delay was unintentional.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

The requirements for accepting an unintentionally delayed claim for foreign priority include:

1. Filing a petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b).
2. Submitting the priority claim in an application data sheet identifying the foreign application.
3. Providing a certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception applies.
4. Paying the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
5. Submitting a statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date it was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP cites 37 CFR 1.55(e), which states: “A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) in an application data sheet (§ 1.76(b)(6)), identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing, unless previously submitted; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception in paragraph (h), (i), or (j) of this section applies; (3) The petition fee as set forth in § 1.17(m); and (4) A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due under this section and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.” (37 CFR 1.55(e))

A petition to restore the right of priority must include several key elements. The MPEP outlines these requirements:

A petition to restore the right of priority must include: (1) the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing (unless previously submitted); (2) the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (3) a statement that the delay in filing the subsequent application within the twelve-month period was unintentional.

These requirements ensure that the USPTO has all necessary information to consider your petition for priority restoration.

For more information on application data sheet, visit: application data sheet.

For more information on petition fee, visit: petition fee.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on priority restoration, visit: priority restoration.

According to MPEP 214.02, a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority requires the following:

• The priority claim: This must be submitted in an application data sheet (ADS) as required by 35 U.S.C. 119(b), unless previously submitted.
• The petition fee: As set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
• A statement of unintentional delay: A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP states: ‘The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.’ This means that in some cases, additional documentation may be required to support the claim of unintentional delay.

It’s important to note that these requirements apply to priority claims under various statutes, including 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), 386(a), 365(c), 119(e), 120, and 121.

To learn more:

• unintentionally delayed priority claim
• petition requirements
• ADS
• petition fee
• unintentional delay statement

To learn more:

• delayed priority claim
• foreign priority
• patent application

The USPTO handles unintentionally delayed domestic benefit claims similarly to foreign priority claims, but with some specific provisions. According to MPEP 214.02:

‘For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, the specific reference to the prior application must be included in an application data sheet (37 CFR 1.76). For applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, the specific reference to the prior application must be in the first sentence(s) of the specification or in an application data sheet.’

For domestic benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c), a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim must include:

• The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed application, unless previously submitted;
• The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and
• A statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the benefit claim was filed was unintentional.

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

To learn more:

• unintentionally delayed domestic benefit claim
• petition requirements
• ADS
• petition fee
• unintentional delay statement

If you submitted the reference to the prior application within the required time period but in the wrong location, you may not need to file a petition. The MPEP provides guidance on this situation:

If the reference to the prior application was previously submitted within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78 but was not included in the location in the application required by the rule (e.g., if the reference was submitted in an oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter), and the information concerning the benefit claim was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on the first filing receipt, the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 and the petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m) are not required. (MPEP § 211)

However, you are still required to submit the reference in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78. This means:

• For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: File an ADS in compliance with 37 CFR 1.76 with the reference.
• For applications filed before September 16, 2012: File either an amendment to the first sentence(s) of the specification or an ADS in compliance with pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.76.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

Yes, assignment records can be expunged after they have been recorded by the USPTO, but only through a specific petition process. According to MPEP 323.01(d):

‘The USPTO will not expunge any assignment records that have been recorded absent a petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1.59.’

This means that once an assignment record has been officially recorded, it cannot be simply removed or deleted. A formal petition must be filed, demonstrating that the document was submitted by mistake or is of improper character. The USPTO will then review the petition and make a determination on whether to expunge the record.

To learn more:

• recorded assignments
• expungement
• USPTO
• petition requirements

Yes, a petition under 37 CFR 1.47(a) can be filed for multiple unavailable inventors. The MPEP 409.03(b) states:

‘Where there are joint inventors, each nonsigning inventor must be petitioned for separately, even if more than one nonsigning inventor is unavailable.’

This means that while a single petition can cover multiple unavailable inventors, the petition must address each inventor individually, providing specific information and evidence for each one’s unavailability.

To learn more:

• multiple inventors
• 37 CFR 1.47(a)
• petition requirements

To learn more:

• 37 CFR 1.47(a)

The distinction between unintentional and intentional delay is crucial when filing a delayed benefit claim. The MPEP 211.04 addresses this:

‘A petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) for the benefit of a prior-filed application must be accompanied by: … (3) A statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78(d)(3) and the date the benefit claim was filed was unintentional.’

An unintentional delay may be caused by oversight, administrative error, or other circumstances not intended to delay the filing. Intentional delay, on the other hand, implies a deliberate choice not to file the benefit claim on time. Only unintentional delays can be remedied through a petition. Intentional delays are not excusable and will result in the denial of the delayed benefit claim.

To learn more:

• unintentional delay
• intentional delay
• delayed benefit claim
• petition requirements

A petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include several elements. According to MPEP 211.01(a):

‘A petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b) requires: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application, which must be included in application data sheet (unless previously submitted in an application data sheet); (B) the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the delay in filing the nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78(a)(1)(i) was unintentional.’

The petition must be filed in the subsequent application (nonprovisional or international application designating the US) within 14 months of the provisional application’s filing date. The USPTO may require additional information to verify that the delay was unintentional.

For more information on benefit restoration, visit: benefit restoration.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

If the last-known address of an unavailable inventor is invalid, the petitioner must make a diligent effort to find a valid address. According to MPEP 409.03(b):

‘If the last known address of the nonsigning inventor(s) is invalid, petitioner must state what efforts were made to find a current address.’

This means the petitioner should document their attempts to locate the inventor, which may include searching public records, contacting former employers, or using people-finding services. If all efforts fail, this should be clearly stated in the petition.

To learn more:

• inventor address
• diligent effort
• petition requirements

To expunge an assignment record at the USPTO, clear evidence must be provided that the document was submitted by mistake or is of improper character. The MPEP 323.01(d) states:

‘The USPTO will not expunge any assignment records that have been recorded absent a petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1.59.’

While the MPEP doesn’t provide specific examples of acceptable evidence, it generally includes:

• Documentation showing the assignment was recorded in error
• Proof that the assignment document contains incorrect information
• Evidence that the assignment was not intended for the specific application or patent

The burden of proof lies with the petitioner to demonstrate why the assignment record should be expunged. Each case is evaluated on its own merits by the USPTO.

To learn more:

• assignment records
• expungement evidence
• USPTO
• petition requirements

According to MPEP 211, a petition to restore the benefit of a provisional application under 37 CFR 1.78(b) must include:

1. The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application (unless previously submitted)
2. The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m)
3. A statement that the delay in filing the subsequent nonprovisional application or international application designating the United States within the twelve-month period was unintentional

The MPEP further states:

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

It’s important to note that this petition must be filed in the subsequent application, not the provisional application itself.

For more information on patent procedure, visit: patent procedure.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

To file a delayed priority claim, you must submit a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority. According to 37 CFR 1.55(e), the petition must include:

1. The priority claim in an application data sheet
2. A certified copy of the foreign application (unless exceptions apply)
3. The petition fee
4. A statement that the entire delay was unintentional

The MPEP states: A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim […]; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application […]; (3) The petition fee […]; and (4) A statement that the entire delay […] was unintentional.

Filing a delayed benefit claim for a provisional application requires specific components. MPEP 211.04 outlines the requirements:

The petition must be accompanied by: (A) the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior provisional application (unless previously submitted); (B) a petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (C) a statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the claim was filed was unintentional.

For petitions filed more than two years after the due date, additional explanation of the delay circumstances is required to establish that the entire delay was unintentional.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on provisional application, visit: provisional application.

For more information on unintentional delay, visit: unintentional delay.

The requirements for accepting an unintentionally delayed claim for foreign priority include:

1. Filing a petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b).
2. Submitting the priority claim in an application data sheet identifying the foreign application.
3. Providing a certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception applies.
4. Paying the petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
5. Submitting a statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date it was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP cites 37 CFR 1.55(e), which states: “A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by: (1) The priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) in an application data sheet (§ 1.76(b)(6)), identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing, unless previously submitted; (2) A certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception in paragraph (h), (i), or (j) of this section applies; (3) The petition fee as set forth in § 1.17(m); and (4) A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due under this section and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.” (37 CFR 1.55(e))

A petition to restore the right of priority must include several key elements. The MPEP outlines these requirements:

A petition to restore the right of priority must include: (1) the priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) in an application data sheet, identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing (unless previously submitted); (2) the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and (3) a statement that the delay in filing the subsequent application within the twelve-month period was unintentional.

These requirements ensure that the USPTO has all necessary information to consider your petition for priority restoration.

For more information on application data sheet, visit: application data sheet.

For more information on petition fee, visit: petition fee.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

For more information on priority restoration, visit: priority restoration.

According to MPEP 214.02, a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim for priority requires the following:

• The priority claim: This must be submitted in an application data sheet (ADS) as required by 35 U.S.C. 119(b), unless previously submitted.
• The petition fee: As set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m).
• A statement of unintentional delay: A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional.

The MPEP states: ‘The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.’ This means that in some cases, additional documentation may be required to support the claim of unintentional delay.

It’s important to note that these requirements apply to priority claims under various statutes, including 35 U.S.C. 119(a)-(d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), 386(a), 365(c), 119(e), 120, and 121.

To learn more:

• unintentionally delayed priority claim
• petition requirements
• ADS
• petition fee
• unintentional delay statement

To learn more:

• delayed priority claim
• foreign priority
• patent application

The USPTO handles unintentionally delayed domestic benefit claims similarly to foreign priority claims, but with some specific provisions. According to MPEP 214.02:

‘For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, the specific reference to the prior application must be included in an application data sheet (37 CFR 1.76). For applications filed prior to September 16, 2012, the specific reference to the prior application must be in the first sentence(s) of the specification or in an application data sheet.’

For domestic benefit claims under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c), a petition to accept an unintentionally delayed claim must include:

• The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 or 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed application, unless previously submitted;
• The petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m); and
• A statement that the entire delay between the date the benefit claim was due under 37 CFR 1.78 and the date the benefit claim was filed was unintentional.

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

To learn more:

• unintentionally delayed domestic benefit claim
• petition requirements
• ADS
• petition fee
• unintentional delay statement

If you submitted the reference to the prior application within the required time period but in the wrong location, you may not need to file a petition. The MPEP provides guidance on this situation:

If the reference to the prior application was previously submitted within the time period set forth in 37 CFR 1.78 but was not included in the location in the application required by the rule (e.g., if the reference was submitted in an oath or declaration or the application transmittal letter), and the information concerning the benefit claim was recognized by the Office as shown by its inclusion on the first filing receipt, the petition under 37 CFR 1.78 and the petition fee under 37 CFR 1.17(m) are not required. (MPEP § 211)

However, you are still required to submit the reference in compliance with 37 CFR 1.78. This means:

• For applications filed on or after September 16, 2012: File an ADS in compliance with 37 CFR 1.76 with the reference.
• For applications filed before September 16, 2012: File either an amendment to the first sentence(s) of the specification or an ADS in compliance with pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.76.

For more information on petition requirements, visit: petition requirements.

Yes, assignment records can be expunged after they have been recorded by the USPTO, but only through a specific petition process. According to MPEP 323.01(d):

‘The USPTO will not expunge any assignment records that have been recorded absent a petition pursuant to 37 CFR 1.59.’

This means that once an assignment record has been officially recorded, it cannot be simply removed or deleted. A formal petition must be filed, demonstrating that the document was submitted by mistake or is of improper character. The USPTO will then review the petition and make a determination on whether to expunge the record.

To learn more:

• recorded assignments
• expungement
• USPTO
• petition requirements

Yes, a petition under 37 CFR 1.47(a) can be filed for multiple unavailable inventors. The MPEP 409.03(b) states:

‘Where there are joint inventors, each nonsigning inventor must be petitioned for separately, even if more than one nonsigning inventor is unavailable.’

This means that while a single petition can cover multiple unavailable inventors, the petition must address each inventor individually, providing specific information and evidence for each one’s unavailability.

To learn more:

• multiple inventors
• 37 CFR 1.47(a)
• petition requirements

To learn more:

• 37 CFR 1.47(a)