Who declares and administers an interference proceeding?

The declaration and administration of an interference proceeding involve multiple parties within the USPTO. According to MPEP 2301: “Once an interference has been suggested under 37 CFR 41.202, the examiner refers the suggested interference to the Board. An administrative patent judge declares the interference, which is then administered at the Board.” Specifically: The examiner initially…

Read More

Who typically conducts an inter partes reexamination?

Typically, the same patent examiner who decided to grant the reexamination request conducts the examination. As stated in MPEP § 2655: “The examination is ordinarily conducted by the same patent examiner who made the decision that the reexamination request should be granted.” This ensures continuity and familiarity with the case throughout the reexamination process. To…

Read More

Who typically conducts ex parte reexaminations?

Typically, the same patent examiner who made the decision on whether the reexamination request should be granted conducts the examination. As stated in MPEP § 2255: “The examination will ordinarily be conducted by the same patent examiner who made the decision on whether the reexamination request should be granted.” This ensures continuity in the examination…

Read More

When can an examiner make a rejection based on prosecution laches?

An examiner should exercise caution when considering a rejection based on prosecution laches. According to MPEP 2190: “An examiner should obtain approval from the TC Director before making a rejection on the grounds of prosecution history laches.” This requirement ensures that such rejections are made only in egregious cases of unreasonable and unexplained delay in…

Read More

What is the role of the patent examiner in investigating potential public uses under the AIA?

Under the AIA, patent examiners play an important role in investigating potential public uses that could affect the patentability of an invention. The MPEP provides guidance on this matter: “[O]nce an examiner becomes aware that a claimed invention has been the subject of a potentially public use, the examiner should require the applicant to provide…

Read More