What is an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) and when should an examiner consult one?
An Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) is an expert in each Technology Center (TC) who must be consulted when suggesting an interference to the Board. Examiners should consult an IPS when they first become aware of a potential interference or when any interference issue arises during prosecution of an application. According to the MPEP, Examiners are…
Read MoreHow does an examiner suggest an interference when an interfering claim already exists in an application?
When an interfering claim already exists in an application, the process for suggesting an interference is different. According to MPEP 2304.04(a): “If the applicant already has a claim to the same subject matter as a claim in the application or patent of another inventor, then there is no need to require the applicant to add…
Read MoreWhat is the role of an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) in post-interference examination?
An Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) plays a crucial role in post-interference examination, particularly when dealing with claims from a losing party. According to MPEP 2308.03: “The examiner should consult with an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) before allowing a claim to a losing party that was added or amended during post-interference examination.” This consultation is important…
Read MoreWhat is the role of an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) in patent interference proceedings?
An Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) plays a crucial role in patent interference proceedings. According to MPEP 2304.04(a), the IPS works with the examiner to suggest interferences to the Board. The IPS has several responsibilities: Reviewing the examiner’s suggestion for interference Potentially requiring the examiner to prepare a memorandum for the Board on specific subjects Possibly…
Read MoreWhat is the role of an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) in patent interferences?
An Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) plays a crucial role in the interference process. According to MPEP 2304: “In either circumstance, the examiner must consult with an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS), who may then refer the suggested interference to the Board.” The IPS serves as an expert consultant for examiners when an interference is suggested. They…
Read MoreWhat is the role of an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) in patent examination?
An Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) plays a crucial role in guiding examiners through the complex process of interference proceedings. The MPEP 2301 emphasizes the importance of consulting with an IPS: “Given the infrequency, cost, and complexity of interferences and derivation proceedings, it is important for the examiner to consult immediately with an Interference Practice Specialist…
Read MoreHow does an examiner initiate an interference proceeding?
An examiner can initiate an interference proceeding in two ways: Invite the applicant to suggest an interference pursuant to 37 CFR 41.202(a). Work with an Interference Practice Specialist (IPS) to suggest an interference to the Board. The MPEP states: “The examiner may invite the applicant to suggest an interference pursuant to 37 CFR 41.202(a). An…
Read MoreCan examination continue in related cases during an interference proceeding?
Yes, examination can continue in related cases during an interference proceeding. According to MPEP 2307.03, “examination may continue in related cases, including any benefit files.” However, the examiner is prohibited from acting on the patent or application directly involved in the interference, as stated in 37 CFR 41.103. Once the examination of related cases is…
Read MoreWhat happens if additional parties are discovered during an interference proceeding?
If additional parties with claims to the same invention are discovered during an interference proceeding, the examiner should take specific steps. According to MPEP 2307.04: “During the course of an interference, the examiner may come across applications or patents of parties that claim the same invention, but are not already involved in the interference. If…
Read More