What evidence is needed to prove commercial success in patent applications?
To prove commercial success as evidence of non-obviousness in patent applications, applicants must provide substantial and credible evidence. According to MPEP 716.03(a), the following types of evidence are typically required: Sales figures: Actual sales data for the product embodying the claimed invention Market share: Information on the product’s share of the relevant market Growth in…
Read MoreWhat evidence is needed to support a claim of long-felt need in a patent application?
To support a claim of long-felt need in a patent application, applicants must provide objective evidence as outlined in MPEP 716.04. The following types of evidence are crucial: Problem recognition: Evidence that the problem was recognized and articulated in the art. This can include published articles, industry reports, or expert testimonies discussing the problem. Persistence…
Read MoreHow can common ownership be established for the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception?
To establish common ownership for the 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) exception, the following statement is sufficient according to the MPEP: Application [the application serial number] and the subject matter disclosed in the reference(s) [the patent identifier of the commonly owned applied art (whether U.S. patents, U.S. patent applications, U.S. patent application publications, or WIPO patent publications)…
Read MoreIs an enabling disclosure required for a 37 CFR 1.130(a) declaration?
No, an enabling disclosure is not required for a declaration under 37 CFR 1.130(a). The MPEP explicitly states: There is no requirement that the affidavit or declaration demonstrate that the disclosure by the inventor, a joint inventor, or another who obtained the subject matter disclosed directly or indirectly from an inventor or a joint inventor…
Read MoreWhat are the eligibility requirements for prioritized examination?
The eligibility requirements for prioritized examination include: The application must be a utility or plant nonprovisional application, including continuing applications. The application must not contain more than four independent claims and thirty total claims, with no multiple dependent claims. Specific fees must be paid, including the prioritized examination fee, processing fee, and publication fee. For…
Read MoreWhat is the ‘effective filing date’ for a claimed invention?
The ‘effective filing date’ for a claimed invention is defined in 35 U.S.C. 100(i)(1) as follows: The term “effective filing date” for a claimed invention in a patent or application for patent means—(A) if subparagraph (B) does not apply, the actual filing date of the patent or the application for the patent containing a claim…
Read MoreCan ‘Easily Erasable’ paper be used for patent applications?
The use of ‘Easily Erasable’ paper for patent applications is discouraged. According to MPEP 714.07: So-called ‘Easily Erasable’ paper having a special coating so that erasures can be made more easily may not provide a ‘permanent’ copy. This type of paper may not meet the requirement for permanent records as specified in 37 CFR 1.52(a).…
Read MoreCan an applicant dispute the USPTO’s determination of reply period dates?
Yes, an applicant can dispute the USPTO’s determination of reply period dates. According to MPEP 711.03(b): However, the examiner and the applicant may disagree as to the date on which the period for reply commenced to run or ends. In this situation, as in the situation involving sufficiency of reply, the applicant may take issue…
Read MoreWhat is the difference between reinstating canceled text and canceled claims in a patent application?
While both processes involve restoring previously removed content, there are key differences in reinstating canceled text versus canceled claims in a patent application. MPEP 608.01(s) outlines these differences: Canceled Text in Specification: “Canceled text in the specification can be reinstated only by a subsequent amendment presenting the previously canceled matter as a new insertion.” Canceled…
Read MoreWhat is the difference between a petition to withdraw holding of abandonment and a petition for revival?
What is the difference between a petition to withdraw holding of abandonment and a petition for revival? Understanding the difference between a petition to withdraw holding of abandonment and a petition for revival is crucial for patent applicants dealing with potential abandonment issues. According to MPEP 711.03(c): ‘Where an applicant contends that the application is…
Read More