What is a requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105?
A requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105 is a request made by the patent examiner to the applicant for additional information that is deemed necessary for the examination of a patent application. According to the MPEP, The requirement must clearly indicate that a requirement under 37 CFR 1.105 is being made, the basis for…
Read MoreCan an examiner make a requirement for information after a final Office action?
Can an examiner make a requirement for information after a final Office action? Yes, an examiner can make a requirement for information after a final Office action, but with certain limitations. According to MPEP 704.14(c): Quote: “A requirement for information made after a final rejection must be accompanied by a showing of good and sufficient…
Read MoreCan an examiner make a requirement for information after a final Office action?
Can an examiner make a requirement for information after a final Office action? Yes, an examiner can make a requirement for information after a final Office action, but with certain limitations. According to MPEP 704.10: “A requirement for information made after a final rejection must be accompanied by a showing on the part of the…
Read MoreWhat is a requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105?
A requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105 is a request made by the patent examiner to the applicant for additional information that is deemed necessary for the examination of a patent application. The MPEP states that: A requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105 should be narrowly specified and limited in scope. It is…
Read MoreCan applicants request paragraph numbering in office actions if it’s not provided?
While MPEP 707.07(k) recommends paragraph numbering as good practice, it does not explicitly address whether applicants can request it. The MPEP states: It is good practice to number the paragraphs of the Office action consecutively. If an office action is received without paragraph numbering, applicants may consider: Informally requesting the examiner to use paragraph numbering…
Read MoreHow long is the reply period for a requirement for information sent with an Office action on the merits?
When a requirement for information under 37 CFR 1.105 is sent with an Office action on the merits, the reply period is the same as the period given for the Office action. According to MPEP ยง 704.13: Requirements sent with an Office action on the merits, and not as a separate Office action, will be…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of repeating or referring to prior actions in patent office communications?
MPEP 707.07(e) emphasizes the importance of repeating or referring to prior actions in patent office communications. The section states: “Every point in the prior action of an examiner which is still applicable must be repeated or referred to, to prevent the implied waiver of the requirement.” The purpose of this practice is to ensure that…
Read MoreCan prosecution be reopened after an Ex parte Quayle action?
Generally, prosecution on the merits is closed after an Ex parte Quayle action is issued. The MPEP 714.14 states: Prosecution on the merits is closed in accordance with the practice under Ex parte Quayle, 25 USPQ 74, 453 OG 213 (Comm’r Pat. 1935). However, this closure primarily relates to substantive examination. The prosecution may continue…
Read MoreWhat is the relationship between a motion under 37 CFR 41.208 and an amendment under 37 CFR 1.312?
The relationship between a motion under 37 CFR 41.208 and an amendment under 37 CFR 1.312 is crucial for applications in issue. According to MPEP 714.16(b), “Where an amendment filed with a motion under 37 CFR 41.208(c)(2) applies to an application in issue, the amendment is not entered unless and until the motion has been…
Read MoreCan examiners remove papers from the patent file wrapper?
Can examiners remove papers from the patent file wrapper? No, examiners are not permitted to remove papers from the patent file wrapper. The MPEP 724.01 clearly states: ‘No paper legally entered in the application file should be permanently removed from the file wrapper.’ This rule ensures the integrity and completeness of the patent record. If…
Read More