What is the significance of MPEP 402.08 for independent inventors in interference proceedings?

MPEP 402.08 has important implications for independent inventors involved in interference proceedings. The key provision states: While an application is involved in an interference or derivation proceeding, any power of attorney of or revocation of power of attorney should be forwarded to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for consideration. For independent inventors, this means:…

Read More

How does MPEP 402.08 affect patent attorneys during derivation proceedings?

MPEP 402.08 has significant implications for patent attorneys involved in derivation proceedings. The key provision states: While an application is involved in an interference or derivation proceeding, any power of attorney of or revocation of power of attorney should be forwarded to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for consideration. For patent attorneys, this means:…

Read More

How does the MPEP address the issue of unavailable joint inventors for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012?

The Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) addresses the issue of unavailable joint inventors for applications filed on or after September 16, 2012, in section 409.02. This section provides guidance on how to proceed when a joint inventor is unavailable or unwilling to participate in the patent application process. Key points from MPEP 409.02 include:…

Read More

What is the purpose of MPEP 409.03?

MPEP 409.03 provides guidance on how to handle patent applications filed before September 16, 2012 when an inventor is unavailable or unwilling to sign the application. It outlines the procedures for filing an application under pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.47 when: A joint inventor refuses to join in an application or cannot be found/reached after diligent…

Read More

How does MPEP 409.03(f) address situations involving deceased or legally incapacitated inventors?

MPEP 409.03(f) provides guidance on handling patent applications when an inventor is deceased or legally incapacitated. The section states: ‘When an inventor dies during the time intervening between the filing of the application and the granting of a patent thereon, the letters patent may be issued to the legal representative or assignee on compliance with…

Read More

How does the MPEP 409.03(f) guidance apply to continuation-in-part applications?

The guidance in MPEP 409.03(f) specifically addresses the issue of continuation-in-part (CIP) applications in relation to assignments. According to MPEP 409.03(f): “An assignment of an application and any ‘reissue, division, or continuation of said application’ does not itself establish an assignment of a continuation-in-part application. In re Gray, 115 USPQ 80 (Comm’r Pat. 1956).” This…

Read More

What evidence can be submitted as proof of proprietary interest under MPEP 409.03(f)?

According to MPEP 409.03(f), various forms of evidence can be submitted as proof of proprietary interest. The section states: ‘Sufficient proprietary interest is shown by an assignment or assignment of the invention to a person who is under an obligation of assignment to the applicant… Other examples of documents which may be submitted to establish…

Read More

Is MPEP 409.03(g) applicable to all patent applications?

No, MPEP 409.03(g) is not applicable to all patent applications. As stated in the editor’s note at the beginning of the section: This MPEP section is not applicable to applications filed on or after September 16, 2012. This means that the guidance provided in MPEP 409.03(g) regarding proof of irreparable damage only applies to patent…

Read More