What is the purpose of a panel review conference in ex parte reexamination?
A panel review conference in ex parte reexamination serves several important purposes: To discuss the issuance of the final Office action To ensure the quality and consistency of the final rejection To provide additional perspectives on the examiner’s decision To confirm or revise the examiner’s preliminary decision to reject and/or allow claims MPEP § 2271…
Read MoreWhat are the rules for conducting interviews in ex parte reexamination proceedings?
Interviews in ex parte reexamination proceedings are subject to specific rules as outlined in MPEP 2281: Interviews must be conducted in the Office during designated hours. Only the patent owner and/or their representative can participate; third-party requesters are not permitted. Interviews for discussing patentability are not allowed before the first official action. Interviews should be…
Read MoreWhat are the criteria for making a rejection final in an ex parte reexamination?
The criteria for making a rejection final in an ex parte reexamination proceeding are similar to those used in regular patent applications. According to MPEP § 2271: “The criteria for making a rejection final in an ex parte reexamination proceeding is analogous to that set forth in MPEP § 706.07(a) for making a rejection final…
Read MoreWhat is the process for issuing a final action in an ex parte reexamination?
The process for issuing a final action in an ex parte reexamination involves several steps: Developing a clear issue between the examiner and the patent owner Providing the patent owner with information and references twice before making the action final Conducting a panel review conference to discuss the issuance of the final action Preparing and…
Read MoreWhat is the process for preparing a decision on a request for ex parte reexamination?
The process for preparing a decision on a request for ex parte reexamination involves several steps, as outlined in MPEP 2246: The reexamination file is reviewed in the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) to ensure it’s ready for examination. The proceeding is assigned to an examiner. The examiner prepares for and sets up a panel review…
Read MoreWhat evidence is required when relying on scientific theory in patent examinations?
When a patent examiner relies on a scientific theory during the examination process, it’s crucial to provide supporting evidence. According to MPEP 2144.02: “When an examiner relies on a scientific theory, evidentiary support for the existence and meaning of that theory must be provided.” This requirement ensures that the application of scientific theories in patent…
Read MoreHow should examiners evaluate the improvement to technology in a patent application?
Examiners should follow a two-step process to evaluate improvements to technology in a patent application, as outlined in MPEP 2106.04(d)(1): Evaluate the specification: The examiner should first determine if the disclosure provides sufficient details for one of ordinary skill in the art to recognize the claimed invention as providing an improvement. The MPEP states: “The…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the subjective requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(b)?
The subjective requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) is evaluated based on the inventor’s or joint inventors’ perspective of their invention. As stated in MPEP 2171: “The first requirement is a subjective one because it is dependent on what the inventor or a joint inventor for a patent regards as his or her invention.” This means…
Read MoreHow do examiners evaluate prophetic examples in patent applications?
Patent examiners evaluate prophetic examples in the context of the entire disclosure to determine if they contribute to meeting the enablement requirement. According to MPEP 2164.02: “The mere fact that something has not actually been done does not mean that it cannot be enabled; there is no requirement that an inventor actually carry out the…
Read MoreHow should patent examiners evaluate claims that might have previously been rejected under the Old Combination principle?
Patent examiners should evaluate claims based on their compliance with current statutory requirements, particularly 35 U.S.C. 112(b), rather than using the Old Combination principle. The MPEP 2173.05(j) states: “Claims should be considered proper so long as they comply with the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph.” This means examiners…
Read More