What is the USPTO’s stance on rejecting patent claims for “aggregation”?

According to the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) 2173.05(k), patent claims should not be rejected on the grounds of “aggregation.” The MPEP states: “A claim should not be rejected on the ground of ‘aggregation.’” This guidance is based on legal precedents, including In re Gustafson and In re Collier, which established that rejections for…

Read More

Can a reexamination be ordered for claims not specifically requested in the reexamination request?

Generally, the USPTO’s determination in both the order for reexamination and the examination stage will be limited to the claims for which reexamination was specifically requested. However, the Office has the discretion to reexamine any claim for which reexamination has not been requested. The MPEP states: “The decision to reexamine any claim for which reexamination…

Read More

What happens if reexamination proceedings are not merged?

When reexamination proceedings are not merged, they are typically conducted separately to maintain the “special dispatch” requirement. As explained in MPEP 2686.01: “If the Office does not merge, the first reexamination proceeding can be concluded, and any question of patentability raised by the second reexamination request can be resolved in the second proceeding, with no…

Read More

How does the USPTO handle terms of degree in patent claims?

The USPTO handles terms of degree in patent claims by evaluating whether the specification provides some standard for measuring that degree. According to MPEP 2173.02: “Terms of degree are not necessarily indefinite… If the specification does provide some standard for measuring that degree, a rejection is not warranted… For example, in Ex parte Oetiker, 23…

Read More

How does the USPTO handle claims that potentially cover inoperative embodiments?

The USPTO’s approach to claims that potentially cover inoperative embodiments is nuanced. The presence of some inoperative embodiments within the scope of a claim does not necessarily render the claim non-enabled. According to the MPEP: “The presence of inoperative embodiments within the scope of a claim does not necessarily render a claim nonenabled. The standard…

Read More

How does the USPTO handle ex parte reexamination when all claims are held invalid by a court?

When a court issues a final decision holding all claims invalid or unenforceable in a patent undergoing ex parte reexamination, the USPTO has specific procedures to follow. According to MPEP 2286: “If all of the claims being examined in the reexamination proceeding are finally held invalid or unenforceable, the reexamination will be vacated by the…

Read More

How does the USPTO evaluate the nature of a transformation in patent claims?

The USPTO evaluates the nature of a transformation in patent claims by considering several factors. According to MPEP 2106.05(c), examiners should consider the following: The particularity or generality of the transformation: More specific transformations are more likely to be meaningful. The degree to which the recited article is particular: A transformation applied to a specific…

Read More