How does the USPTO define “separately usable” in the context of subcombinations?
The USPTO defines “separately usable” in the context of subcombinations as follows: According to MPEP 806.05(d), “The burden is on the examiner to provide an example to support the determination that the inventions are distinct, but the example need not be documented.” The MPEP further clarifies: “A subcombination is separately usable if it has utility…
Read MoreHow does MPEP 806.05 define “related inventions”?
How does MPEP 806.05 define “related inventions”? MPEP 806.05 defines related inventions as those that are distinct but have a relationship. Specifically, the MPEP states: “Related inventions are distinct if the inventions as claimed are not connected in at least one of design, operation, or effect (e.g., can be made by, or used in, a…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO define an abandoned patent application?
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) defines an abandoned patent application through the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) 203.05. According to this section, an abandoned application is defined as: An abandoned application is, inter alia, one which is removed from the Office docket of pending applications This removal from the docket can…
Read More