What is the significance of a Notice of Intent to Issue Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate (NIRC)?
A Notice of Intent to Issue Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate (NIRC) is a crucial document in the ex parte reexamination process. Its significance is outlined in MPEP 2260: “If the patent owner’s response overcomes all rejections and objections, a Notice of Intent to Issue Ex Parte Reexamination Certificate (NIRC) should be issued.” The NIRC serves…
Read MoreWhat is the significance of MPEP § 2277 in relation to Board decisions?
MPEP § 2277 serves as a crucial reference point for understanding how Board decisions are handled in both patent applications and ex parte reexamination proceedings. The section states: “MPEP § 1213 through § 1213.03 relate to decisions of the Board for both applications and ex parte reexamination proceedings.” This reference is significant because it directs…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of a shortened statutory period in ex parte reexamination?
The purpose of a shortened statutory period in ex parte reexamination is to expedite the reexamination process while still providing sufficient time for patent owners to respond. MPEP 2263 states: “A shortened statutory period of two months will generally be set for filing a response to an Office action in an ex parte reexamination.” This…
Read MoreWhat are the service requirements for a patent owner’s statement in ex parte reexamination?
In ex parte reexamination, the patent owner must serve their statement on the requester if the reexamination was requested by a third party. MPEP 2249 states: “A copy of the statement must be served by the patent owner on the requester, unless the request was filed by the patent owner.” Failure to provide proof of…
Read MoreHow can a patent owner seek review of a Substantial New Question of Patentability (SNQ) determination?
A patent owner can seek review of a Substantial New Question of Patentability (SNQ) determination before the Board along with an appeal of the examiner’s rejections. The MPEP outlines the process: “To obtain review of the SNQ issue, patent owner must include the SNQ issue and the appropriate arguments in its appeal brief to the…
Read MoreWhat is the scope of prior art considered in ex parte reexamination?
What is the scope of prior art considered in ex parte reexamination? In ex parte reexamination, the scope of prior art considered is broader than in the original examination. According to MPEP 2258: “The consideration of prior art in ex parte reexamination is, however, limited to prior patents or printed publications applied under the appropriate…
Read MoreWhat is the scope of an ex parte reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 304?
An ex parte reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 304 provides a complete reexamination of the patent claims based on prior art patents and printed publications. The MPEP states: “A reexamination proceeding ordered under 35 U.S.C. 304 provides a complete reexamination of the patent claims on the basis of prior art patents and printed publications.” Additionally, double…
Read MoreHow does the scope of issues considered in ex parte reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 257 differ from standard reexaminations?
The scope of issues considered in ex parte reexamination under 35 U.S.C. 257 is broader than in standard reexaminations. MPEP 2823 states: “issues in addition to those raised by patents and printed publications and by subject matter added or deleted during an ex parte reexamination proceeding may be considered and resolved, which differs from 37…
Read MoreWhat is the process for reviving a terminated ex parte reexamination proceeding?
To revive a terminated ex parte reexamination proceeding, the patent owner must file a petition under 37 CFR 1.137. The petition must include: The required reply to the outstanding Office action or notice (if not previously filed) The petition fee as set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(m) A statement that the entire delay was unintentional…
Read MoreCan a patentability decision favoring the patentee be reviewed in ex parte reexamination?
No, a patentability decision favoring the patentee cannot be reviewed in ex parte reexamination. The MPEP 2273 clearly states: “The reexamination statute does not provide for review of a patentability decision favoring the patentee.” This principle is supported by case law, specifically “Greenwood v. Seiko Instruments, 8 USPQ2d 1455 (D.D.C. 1988).” This limitation is an…
Read More