Who is subject to the Duty of Disclosure?
The Duty of Disclosure applies to several parties involved in the patent application process. According to MPEP 2001, the following individuals are subject to this duty: The inventor(s) The attorney or agent who prepares or prosecutes the application Every other person who is substantively involved in the preparation or prosecution of the application and who…
Read MoreWho has the duty to disclose information to the USPTO?
The duty to disclose information to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) applies to various individuals involved in the patent application process. While the specific MPEP section provided doesn’t elaborate on this, it’s generally understood that this duty extends to: Inventors Patent attorneys or agents representing the applicant Anyone substantively involved in the…
Read MoreWho can file a petition for patent term adjustment?
While MPEP 2736 does not explicitly state who can file a petition for patent term adjustment, it clearly indicates who cannot file such petitions. The section states: “No submission or petition on behalf of a third party concerning patent term adjustment under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) will be considered by the Office.” By inference, this means…
Read MoreHow does the invalidation of the Old Combination principle affect patent applicants?
The invalidation of the Old Combination principle generally benefits patent applicants by removing a potential barrier to patentability. According to MPEP 2173.05(j): “Accordingly, a claim should not be rejected on the ground of old combination.” This means that patent applicants can now claim inventions that combine old elements with new or improved elements without fear…
Read MoreHow does MPEP 704 impact patent applicants?
MPEP 704 has significant implications for patent applicants. It outlines the procedures that patent examiners follow when conducting searches and requesting additional information, which directly affects how applications are examined and prosecuted. For applicants, this means: Their inventions will be subject to thorough prior art searches. They may be required to provide additional information or…
Read MoreHow does the ‘No Inter Partes Questions Discussed Ex Parte’ rule affect patent applicants?
The ‘No Inter Partes Questions Discussed Ex Parte’ rule, as outlined in MPEP 713.06, affects patent applicants by: Ensuring fair treatment: All parties receive the same information and opportunities during the examination process. Limiting private communications: Applicants cannot discuss matters involving other parties with the examiner in private. Promoting transparency: All relevant discussions and decisions…
Read MoreWho has the duty to disclose material information to the USPTO?
The duty to disclose material information to the USPTO applies to several parties involved in the patent application process. According to MPEP 724: Inventors and others covered by 37 CFR 1.56(c) and 1.555 have a duty to disclose to the Office information they are aware of which is material to patentability. This duty extends to:…
Read MoreWhat are the implications of MPEP 706.05 for patent applicants?
MPEP 706.05 has significant implications for patent applicants. The section states: “See MPEP § 1308.01 for a rejection based on a reference after allowance.” This means that: Applicants should be aware that allowance doesn’t guarantee final approval of their patent. New references or information can lead to rejection even after allowance. Applicants should remain vigilant…
Read More