What is the “substantial new question of patentability” criterion in patent reexamination?
The “substantial new question of patentability” (SNQ) is a key criterion for deciding whether to grant a request for patent reexamination. According to the MPEP, A prior art patent or printed publication raises a substantial question of patentability where there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable examiner would consider the prior art patent or…
Read MoreHow does the “reasonable likelihood that the requester will prevail” standard differ from the SNQ standard?
The “reasonable likelihood that the requester will prevail” (RLP) standard was introduced for reexaminations filed between September 16, 2011, and September 16, 2012. This standard is considered more stringent than the “substantial new question of patentability” (SNQ) standard. According to the MPEP, which cites House Rep. 112-98: “The threshold for initiating an inter partes review…
Read MoreHow does a prior adverse decision by the USPTO affect the determination of a substantial new question of patentability?
A prior adverse decision by the USPTO can significantly impact the determination of a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) in a reexamination proceeding. The MPEP provides guidance on this issue: Prior adverse decisions on the same prior art: If the USPTO has previously made an adverse decision on patentability based on the same prior…
Read MoreCan “old art” be used to establish a substantial new question of patentability?
Yes, “old art” (prior art previously cited or considered by the USPTO) can be used to establish a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) in certain circumstances. The MPEP states: “For any reexamination ordered on or after November 2, 2002, the effective date of the statutory revision, reliance on previously cited/considered art, i.e., ‘old art,’…
Read MoreHow does the KSR decision affect the determination of a substantial new question of patentability?
The KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. decision, which clarified the legal standard for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103, does not directly alter the standard for determining whether a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) exists. The MPEP states: “Note that the clarification of the legal standard for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103…
Read MoreWhat is an “earlier concluded examination or review” in the context of patent reexamination?
An “earlier concluded examination or review” is a key concept in determining whether a substantial new question of patentability exists. The MPEP defines it as: The original examination of the application which matured into the patent The examination of the patent in a reissue application that has resulted in a reissue of the patent The…
Read MoreWhat is the difference between “a substantial new question of patentability” and a “prima facie case of unpatentability”?
The MPEP distinguishes between “a substantial new question of patentability” (SNQ) and a “prima facie case of unpatentability” in the context of patent reexamination. Specifically: “It is not necessary that a ‘prima facie’ case of unpatentability exist as to the claim in order for ‘a substantial new question of patentability’ to be present as to…
Read MoreHow do court decisions impact the determination of a substantial new question of patentability?
Court decisions can impact the determination of a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ) or reasonable likelihood that the requester will prevail (RLP), but their influence varies depending on the nature of the decision. The MPEP outlines several scenarios: Final holding of validity: A final court decision that a patent claim is not invalid doesn’t…
Read More