What is the relationship between fraud in the original patent and a reissue application?
The MPEP clearly establishes a direct relationship between fraud in the original patent and any subsequent reissue application. It states: Clearly, “fraud” practiced or attempted in an application which issues as a patent is “fraud” practiced or attempted in connection with any subsequent application to reissue that patent. The reissue application and the patent are…
Read MoreHow does fraud or inequitable conduct affect reissue applications?
Fraud, inequitable conduct, or violation of duty of disclosure in the original patent application can significantly impact reissue applications. The MPEP states: “Fraud” cannot be purged through the reissue process. This means that if fraud was committed in the original application, it cannot be remedied by filing a reissue application. Furthermore, the MPEP notes: Clearly,…
Read MoreWhat is the impact of fraud, inequitable conduct, or violation of duty of disclosure on patent claims?
According to MPEP 2016, a finding of fraud, inequitable conduct, or violation of duty of disclosure affects all claims in a patent application or patent, rendering them unpatentable or invalid. The MPEP states: “A finding of ‘fraud,’ ‘inequitable conduct,’ or violation of duty of disclosure with respect to any claim in an application or patent,…
Read MoreWhat happens if fraud is discovered during a reissue application?
What happens if fraud is discovered during a reissue application? If fraud is discovered during the examination of a reissue application, the examiner must take specific actions. According to MPEP 2012: “Where the examiner discovers or is made aware of fraud during the examination of a reissue application, the examiner should consult with the Technology…
Read MoreCan failure to disclose material information affect patent validity?
Yes, failure to disclose material information can significantly affect patent validity. If it is discovered that an applicant or their representative knowingly withheld material information during the patent application process, it could lead to charges of inequitable conduct and potentially render the patent unenforceable. While MPEP 2001.03 does not explicitly discuss the consequences of failing…
Read MoreWhat is the extent of the duty of disclosure?
The duty of disclosure extends to all dealings with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), not just interactions with patent examiners. This comprehensive obligation includes proceedings before various departments within the USPTO. As stated in MPEP 2001.03: “This duty ‘in dealing with’ and ‘to’ the Office extends, of course, to all dealings which…
Read MoreAre there any exceptions to the duty of disclosure to the USPTO?
While the duty of disclosure to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is a crucial aspect of the patent application process, there are some limitations to what needs to be disclosed. The MPEP 2002.01 provides an important clarification: “Information that is not material need not be passed along to the Office.” This statement…
Read MoreCan an examiner require information submitted to other government agencies?
Yes, an examiner can require information submitted to other government agencies under certain circumstances. The MPEP states: “This requirement could include statements made or information submitted to other Government agencies such as the FDA.” For example, when examining a claim related to a drug manufacturing process filed more than a year after FDA approval, an…
Read MoreWhat is the examiner’s responsibility regarding prior art in continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part applications?
When an application under examination is identified as a continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part of an earlier application, the examiner has specific responsibilities regarding prior art. According to MPEP 2001.06(b): “If the application under examination is identified as a continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part of an earlier application, the examiner will consider the prior art properly cited…
Read MoreHow should prior art be evaluated and submitted?
When evaluating and submitting prior art: Carefully evaluate the materiality of prior art against the broadest reasonable interpretation of the claims Consider whether the prior art is the closest to the claimed invention Submit information promptly, even if discovered late in prosecution Avoid submitting long lists of documents; highlight the most significant ones Be cautious…
Read More