Why are ex parte communications prohibited in patent interferences?

Ex parte communications are prohibited in patent interferences to maintain the fairness and integrity of the proceedings. The MPEP 2307.01 explains: “Since an interference involves two or more parties, the integrity of the process requires the opportunity for the opposing party to participate in communications or actions regarding any involved application or patent.” This prohibition…

Read More

What is a threshold issue in a patent interference?

A threshold issue in a patent interference is a critical concept that can potentially end the proceeding early. The MPEP 2301.02 defines it as follows: “Threshold issue means an issue that, if resolved in favor of the movant, would deprive the opponent of standing in the interference. Threshold issues may include: (1) No interference-in-fact, and…

Read More

Why is suspension of prosecution discouraged in potential interference cases?

The MPEP discourages the suspension of prosecution in potential interference cases. Specifically, it states: Suspension of prosecution pending a possible interference should be rare and should not be entered prior to the consultation required by Practice 1 above. This guidance reflects a shift in patent examination practice. The MPEP explains the reasoning behind this approach:…

Read More

What is the definition of “same invention” in the context of patent interference?

In the context of patent interference, the “same invention” is defined by 37 CFR 41.203(a). According to MPEP 2304.04(a), when suggesting an interference, the examiner should include “an explanation of why at least one claim of every application or patent defines the same invention within the meaning of 37 CFR 41.203(a).” This regulation provides the…

Read More

How can an applicant respond to an examiner’s requirement to add a claim for interference?

When an examiner requires an applicant to add a claim for interference under 37 CFR 41.202(c), the applicant must comply but can also express disagreement. The MPEP outlines several ways an applicant can respond: Identify an existing claim in their application or another of their applications that provides a basis for the proposed interference Add…

Read More