Can an applicant’s own activities be used against their patent claims?
Yes, an applicant’s own activities can be used against their patent claims. MPEP 715.01(d) clearly states: ‘The rejection may be based on activities by the inventor(s) or a different inventive entity.’ This means that even the applicant’s own public disclosures, sales, or other activities that occurred before the effective filing date of the claimed invention…
Read MoreWhat is the procedure for reinstating a canceled patent claim?
Reinstating a canceled patent claim requires a specific procedure. According to MPEP 608.01(s): “A claim canceled by amendment (deleted in its entirety) may be reinstated only by a subsequent amendment presenting the claim as a new claim with a new claim number.” This means that if an applicant wishes to reinstate a previously canceled claim,…
Read MoreWhat is a prima facie case of unpatentability?
A prima facie case of unpatentability is a crucial concept in patent law. The MPEP Section 2001.05 defines it as follows: “A prima facie case of unpatentability is established when the information compels a conclusion that a claim is unpatentable under the preponderance of evidence, burden-of-proof standard, giving each term in the claim its broadest…
Read MoreHow should claim numbering be handled in patent applications?
Proper claim numbering is an important aspect of patent application review. MPEP 1302.01 provides guidance on this matter: The claims should be renumbered as required by 37 CFR 1.126, and particular attention should be given to claims dependent on previous claims to see that the numbering is consistent. This means that during the general review…
Read More