How are inconsistencies in reproductions handled in international design applications?

Inconsistencies in reproductions are addressed based on their severity. According to MPEP 2920.04(b): 1. Minor inconsistencies: “When inconsistencies are found among the views, the examiner should object to the reproductions and request that the views be made consistent.” 2. Major inconsistencies: “When the inconsistencies are of such magnitude that the overall appearance of the design…

Read More

How does the examiner handle amendments submitted after final rejection in reexamination?

When handling amendments submitted after final rejection in reexamination, the examiner follows specific guidelines: The first proposed amendment after final action in a reexamination proceeding will be given sufficient consideration to determine whether it places all the claims in condition where they are patentable and/or whether the issues on appeal are reduced or simplified. If…

Read More

How should an examiner handle affidavits or declarations in an examiner’s answer?

When handling affidavits or declarations in an examiner’s answer for an inter partes reexamination proceeding, the examiner should follow the guidance provided in MPEP 2677. The key points are: The examiner should report their conclusions on any affidavits, declarations, or exhibits that were admitted to the record. Affidavits or declarations swearing behind a patent should…

Read More

When should a patent examiner use the full eligibility analysis instead of the streamlined approach?

A patent examiner should use the full eligibility analysis (Alice/Mayo test) instead of the streamlined approach when there is doubt about whether the applicant is seeking coverage for a judicial exception. According to MPEP 2106.06: “However, if there is doubt as to whether the applicant is effectively seeking coverage for a judicial exception itself, the…

Read More