How does the USPTO apply the “Mere Function of Machine” rule during patent examination?

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) applies the “Mere Function of Machine” rule by not rejecting process or method claims solely because they describe the function of a disclosed machine. As stated in MPEP 2173.05(v): “Process or method claims are not subject to rejection by U.S. Patent and Trademark Office examiners under 35…

Read More

Who signs the Issue Classification sheet for allowed patent applications?

According to MPEP 1302.13, both the primary examiner and the assistant examiner involved in the allowance of a patent application are required to sign the Issue Classification sheet. Specifically, the MPEP states: “The primary examiner and the assistant examiner involved in the allowance of an application will apply E-Signatures on the Issue Classification sheet.” This…

Read More

Are USPTO employees allowed to accept bounties for identifying prior art?

No, USPTO employees are strictly prohibited from accepting bounties for identifying prior art. The MPEP 1701 clearly states: “No USPTO employee may pursue a bounty offered by a private sector source for identifying prior art. The acceptance of payments from outside sources for prior art search activities may subject the employee to administrative disciplinary action.”…

Read More

What should practitioners know about making inquiries to patent examiners?

Practitioners should be aware that certain inquiries to patent examiners are considered improper. The MPEP 1701 provides guidance on this matter: “Practitioners shall not make improper inquiries of members of the patent examining corps. Inquiries from members of the public relating to the matters discussed above must out of necessity be refused and such refusal…

Read More

Can patent examiners discuss specific evidence considered during examination?

No, patent examiners are not allowed to discuss specific evidence considered during the examination process with individuals outside the USPTO. The MPEP 1701 states: “Employees of the USPTO, particularly patent examiners who examined an application which matured into a patent or a reissued patent or who conducted a reexamination proceeding, should not discuss or answer…

Read More

Can examiners other than supervisory patent examiners assign applications?

Yes, examiners other than supervisory patent examiners can be given the responsibility of assigning applications. The MPEP 909.02(b) provides guidance on this: “If an examiner other than the supervisory patent examiner is given the responsibility of assigning applications, time so spent may, at the TC Director’s discretion, be charged to ‘Other Time- Classify (non-PGPub) and…

Read More