Is restriction permitted in reexamination proceedings?

No, restriction is not permitted in reexamination proceedings. The MPEP clearly states: “With regard to reexamination proceedings, restriction is not permitted.” This means that during a reexamination of a patent, the examiner cannot require the patent owner to divide the claims into separate applications or to elect a specific group of claims for examination. All…

Read More

What does “restriction becomes proper at a later stage” mean in patent prosecution?

In the context of patent prosecution, the phrase “restriction becomes proper at a later stage” refers to a situation where circumstances change during the examination process, making a previously improper restriction requirement now appropriate. This concept is addressed in MPEP 811.03, which states: “Where a requirement to restrict is made and thereafter withdrawn as improper,…

Read More

How does restriction affect double patenting in patent applications?

The relationship between restriction and double patenting is clearly defined in the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). According to MPEP § 806: “Where restriction is required by the Office double patenting cannot be held…” This statement indicates that when the USPTO requires a restriction in a patent application, it effectively precludes a double patenting…

Read More

What options does an applicant have when receiving Form PCT/IPEA/405?

When an applicant receives Form PCT/IPEA/405, they have two main options: Restrict the claims to comply with the unity of invention requirement Pay additional examination fees to have all inventions examined According to MPEP 1875.01: “The ‘Invitation to restrict or pay additional fees,’ Form PCT/IPEA/405, is used to invite the applicant, at his/her option, to…

Read More

What are the requirements for restricting between two or more related product or process inventions?

To support a requirement for restriction between two or more related product inventions, or between two or more related process inventions, two key elements are necessary: Two-way distinctness Reasons for insisting on restriction MPEP § 806.05(j) states: “To support a requirement for restriction between two or more related product inventions, or between two or more…

Read More

Can an applicant request examination of additional species after an initial election?

Yes, an applicant can request examination of additional species after an initial election under certain circumstances. The MPEP 809.02 provides guidance on this topic: “If applicant presents species claims to more than one patentably distinct species of the invention after an Office action on only generic claims, with no restriction requirement, the Office may require…

Read More