What are the requirements for photographs and graphic representations in international design applications?

The requirements for photographs and graphic representations in international design applications are specified in Administrative Instruction 404 of the Hague Agreement. Key requirements include: For Photographs: Must be of professional standard All edges must be cut at right angles The industrial design must be shown against a neutral plain background Retouching with ink or correcting…

Read More

What documents are required for a petition to excuse unintentional delay in an international design application?

A petition to excuse unintentional delay in an international design application must be accompanied by several documents and fees as specified in 37 CFR 1.1051(a). The required documents include: A copy of any invitation from the International Bureau setting the missed time limit The required reply (unless previously filed) The petition fee A certified copy…

Read More

What is the procedure for seeking relief from prescribed time limits in international design applications?

The procedure for seeking relief from prescribed time limits in international design applications is outlined in 37 CFR 1.1051. This procedure allows applicants to excuse unintentional delays in meeting time limits under the Hague Agreement for requirements related to international design applications. The key components of this procedure include: Filing a petition with the USPTO…

Read More

What is the purpose of recording the Statement of Grant of Protection in the International Register?

The recording of the Statement of Grant of Protection in the International Register serves several important purposes in the context of international design applications. According to MPEP 2940, which cites Hague Rule 18bis(3): “The International Bureau shall record any statement received under this Rule in the International Register, inform the holder accordingly and, where the…

Read More

How are priority claims handled in international design applications?

Priority claims in international design applications are an important aspect of the examination process. The MPEP 2920.05(e) provides guidance on how these claims are handled: “The examiner should determine whether any priority claim made in the international design application is proper. Priority claims are reviewed for compliance with the relevant requirements during both formalities review…

Read More

What changes did the Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012 (PLTIA) make to U.S. design patent law?

The Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012 (PLTIA) made several important changes to U.S. design patent law, particularly in relation to international design applications. According to MPEP 2950, which cites the Senate Executive Report, the main changes were: Providing limited rights to patent applicants between the publication date of their international design application by…

Read More

Can a Statement of Grant of Protection be issued for only some designs in an international registration?

Yes, a Statement of Grant of Protection can be issued for only some of the designs in an international registration. This situation is specifically addressed in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) 2940, which cites Hague Rule 18bis(1)(b)(iii): “Where the statement does not relate to all the industrial designs that are the subject of…

Read More

How can applicants overcome a rejection due to unclear use of coloring in international design applications?

When coloring in international design application drawings is not described in the specification, it can lead to a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) for indefiniteness. To overcome this rejection, applicants can insert a statement in the specification explaining the purpose of the coloring. The MPEP provides the following guidance: “If the coloring identifies matter for…

Read More

What options do applicants have to overcome rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) in international design applications?

Applicants have several options to overcome rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) and (b) in international design applications due to insufficient drawing disclosure. The MPEP suggests the following approach: “Applicant may indicate that protection is not sought for those portions of the reproductions which are considered indefinite and nonenabling in the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112…

Read More