What happens if an applicant fails to reply to a non-final Office action within the period for reply?
If an applicant fails to reply to a non-final Office action within the period for reply, the application becomes abandoned. According to MPEP 711.02(a): An application becomes abandoned if applicant ‘fails to reply’ to an office action within the fixed statutory period. This failure may result either from (A) failure to reply within the statutory…
Read MoreCan a reply be considered responsive if it only addresses some of the rejections?
No, a reply that only addresses some of the rejections is generally not considered fully responsive. The MPEP 714.02 states: ‘In order to be entitled to reconsideration or further examination, the applicant or patent owner must reply to the Office action. The reply by the applicant or patent owner must be reduced to a writing…
Read MoreAfter withdrawing the finality of a rejection, can the next Office action be made final?
Yes, after withdrawing the finality of a rejection, the next Office action can be made final under certain conditions. The MPEP 706.07(d) states: “Once the finality of the Office action has been withdrawn, the next Office action may be made final if the conditions set forth in MPEP § 706.07(a) are met.” This means that…
Read MoreWhat is a new ground of rejection in patent examination?
A new ground of rejection in patent examination refers to a rejection that introduces new prior art or a new statutory basis for rejecting a claim. However, the specific definition can be complex. The MPEP provides guidance on what constitutes a new ground of rejection in MPEP § 1207.03(a). It’s important to note that not…
Read MoreWhat happens when two different periods for reply are running against a patent application?
When two different periods for reply are running against a patent application, the following applies: The first period is typically the regular statutory period. The second period is usually set by a subsequent Office action. The running of the first period is not suspended or affected by an ex parte limited time action or an…
Read MoreWhat does the MPEP say about applications up for third action?
The MPEP emphasizes the importance of efficient examination for applications up for third or subsequent actions. According to MPEP 707.02: The supervisory patent examiners are expected to personally check on the pendency of every application which is up for the third or subsequent Office action with a view to finally concluding its prosecution. This means…
Read MoreIs a 37 CFR 1.105 requirement considered an Office action?
Yes, a 37 CFR 1.105 requirement is considered an Office action, even if it is not accompanied by an action on the merits. The MPEP explicitly states: “Note that a 37 CFR 1.105 requirement, even absent an action on the merits, is an Office action.” This means that a requirement for information under 37 CFR…
Read More