What happens if an Office employee identifies a patent that may warrant reexamination?

If a USPTO employee identifies a patent that they believe clearly warrants reexamination, there is a specific internal process to follow. According to MPEP 2239: “If an Office employee becomes aware of an unusual fact situation in a patent which the employee considers to clearly warrant reexamination, a memorandum setting forth these facts (including a…

Read More

How does the USPTO determine if an SNQ exists for patent reexamination?

The USPTO determines if a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) exists for patent reexamination through a careful evaluation process. According to MPEP 2242: “If a reexamination request relies on references already considered by the Office, the request must demonstrate that a substantial new question of patentability is raised by the art, when the art…

Read More

How does the USPTO decide whether to merge multiple reexamination proceedings?

The decision to merge multiple reexamination proceedings is made by the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) Director or their delegate, typically after reexamination is ordered for the second request. The decision is based on several factors: The need for “special dispatch” in conducting reexamination proceedings, as mandated by 35 U.S.C. 305. The stage of the first…

Read More

What is the difference between USPTO and court standards in patent validity determinations?

The USPTO and federal courts use different standards when determining patent validity, which can lead to different outcomes. MPEP 2286 explains this distinction: “Specifically, invalidity in a district court must be shown by ‘clear and convincing’ evidence, whereas in the Office, it is sufficient to show unpatentability by a ‘preponderance of evidence.’ Since the ‘clear…

Read More

How does the USPTO handle correspondence with patent owners in ex parte reexamination proceedings?

The USPTO has specific guidelines for handling correspondence with patent owners during ex parte reexamination proceedings: Correspondence Address: The MPEP states, “Communications from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to the patent owner will be directed to the correspondence address for the patent being reexamined. See 37 CFR 1.33(c).” No Double Correspondence: “Double correspondence with…

Read More

Are copies of U.S. patents and patent application publications required in reexamination requests?

Generally, copies of U.S. patents and U.S. patent application publications are not required to be submitted with reexamination requests. The MPEP 2218 states: “The requirement for the submission of a copy of every patent or printed publication relied upon or referred to in the request, pursuant to 37 CFR 1.510(b)(3), is waived to the extent…

Read More