Are interviews allowed in ex parte reexamination resulting from supplemental examination?
Yes, interviews are generally permitted in ex parte reexamination proceedings that result from a supplemental examination. The MPEP states: “Interviews conducted in connection with any ex parte reexamination ordered under 35 U.S.C. 257 as a result of the supplemental examination proceeding are governed by the regulations governing ex parte reexamination proceedings.” This means that while…
Read MoreHow do intervening rights apply to ex parte reexamination certificates?
How do intervening rights apply to ex parte reexamination certificates? Intervening rights apply to ex parte reexamination certificates in the same way they apply to reissue patents. According to MPEP 2293: “35 U.S.C. 307(b) provides that statements in an ex parte reexamination certificate do not have the effect of the statements provided in 35 U.S.C.…
Read MoreHow does inter partes reexamination differ from ex parte reexamination?
Inter partes reexamination differs from ex parte reexamination in several procedural aspects, but not in the substance considered. The MPEP states: “Inter partes reexamination differs from ex parte reexamination in matters of procedure, such as when the third party requester can participate, the types of Office actions and the timing of issuance of the Office…
Read MoreCan inter partes reexamination be requested for any patent?
No, inter partes reexamination is not available for all patents. According to the MPEP, “For a patent issued from an application filed prior to November 29, 1999, the statutory inter partes reexamination option is not available, only the ex parte reexamination is available as a reexamination option.” This limitation was due to the effective date…
Read MoreWhat is the difference between correcting inventorship in inter partes and ex parte reexamination?
There is no difference in the process of correcting inventorship between inter partes and ex parte reexamination proceedings. According to MPEP § 2666.03: “Correction of inventorship in an inter partes reexamination proceeding is effected in the same manner that correction of inventorship in an ex parte reexamination proceeding is effected.” This means that regardless of…
Read MoreWhat is the initial processing procedure for ex parte reexamination requests?
The initial processing of ex parte reexamination requests filed under 35 U.S.C. 302 involves specific clerical procedures. According to MPEP 2226: “The opening of all mail marked “Mail Stop Ex Parte Reexam,” and all initial clerical processing of requests for reexamination, will be performed in the Office of Patent Application Processing (OPAP).” This means that…
Read MoreWhat is the initial processing for an ex parte reexamination request under 35 U.S.C. 302?
What is the initial processing for an ex parte reexamination request under 35 U.S.C. 302? The initial processing of an ex parte reexamination request filed under 35 U.S.C. 302 involves several steps: The request is received by the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU). A reexamination file is established and assigned a filing date. The request is…
Read MoreWhat happens if an ex parte reexamination request is incomplete?
If an ex parte reexamination request is incomplete, the following occurs: The Office will notify the requester of the defects in the request. The requester is given 30 days or one month (whichever is longer) to complete the request. If the request is not completed within the time limit, it may be treated as a…
Read MoreWhat happens if a request for ex parte reexamination is incomplete?
If a request for ex parte reexamination is incomplete, the person identified as requesting reexamination will be notified and generally given an opportunity to complete the request within a specified time. The MPEP 2227 states: “If the request does not include the fee for requesting ex parte reexamination required by paragraph (a) of this section…
Read MoreWhat happens if a copy of prior art submitted for reexamination is not legible?
If a copy of prior art submitted for reexamination is not legible, it is considered not to have been provided. The USPTO addresses this issue as stated in MPEP 2218: “If the copy provided is not legible, or is such that its image scanned into the Image File Wrapper system (IFW) will not be legible,…
Read More