How should patent examiners communicate rejections not based on prior art?
According to MPEP 706.03, patent examiners should communicate rejections not based on prior art in a clear and thorough manner. The MPEP states: “Deficiencies should be explained clearly, particularly when they serve as a basis for a rejection. Whenever practicable, USPTO personnel should indicate how rejections may be overcome and how problems may be resolved.”…
Read MoreWhat are the main types of non-prior art rejections in patent examination?
The MPEP 706.03 outlines several types of rejections not based on prior art that may occur during patent examination. These include: Non-statutory subject matter (35 U.S.C. 101) – See MPEP 2106 Lack of utility (35 U.S.C. 101) – See MPEP 2107 Subject matter barred by the Atomic Energy Act – See MPEP 2104.01 Subject matter…
Read MoreWhat are rejections not based on prior art in patent examination?
Rejections not based on prior art are those that do not rely on existing patents or publications to challenge the patentability of an invention. These rejections typically focus on statutory requirements other than novelty or non-obviousness. According to MPEP 706.03, such rejections may include: Lack of adequate written description Lack of enablement Lack of utility…
Read More