What is the difference between abandonment of an invention and abandonment of a patent application?
The MPEP 711 makes an important distinction between abandonment of an invention and abandonment of a patent application. As stated in the MPEP: “Abandonment may be either of the invention or of an application. This discussion is concerned with abandonment of the application for patent.” Here’s the difference: Abandonment of an invention: This refers to…
Read MoreWhat is the importance of corroborating evidence in antedating a reference?
Corroborating evidence plays a crucial role in antedating a reference, as highlighted in MPEP 715.07. The importance of corroboration stems from the need to provide independent support for the inventor’s claims. Key points include: Corroboration helps establish credibility of the inventor’s statements It provides additional weight to the evidence of prior invention Corroborating evidence can…
Read MoreWhat are the formal requirements for a declaration under 37 CFR 1.130(a)?
A declaration under 37 CFR 1.130(a) must meet specific formal requirements to be considered valid. MPEP 717.01(a)(1) outlines these requirements: “The formal requirements for a declaration or affidavit are set forth in 37 CFR 1.68 and 37 CFR 1.130. They are the same as those for any other declaration or affidavit filed in the USPTO.”…
Read MoreWhat are the formal requirements for a declaration under 37 CFR 1.130(a)?
Declarations under 37 CFR 1.130(a) must meet specific formal requirements to be considered valid. According to MPEP 717.01(a)(1), these requirements include: Proper signature: The declaration must be signed by the inventor or joint inventor. Timely filing: It should be filed before the mailing of a final rejection or action that otherwise closes prosecution. Identification of…
Read MoreWhat criteria does an examiner use to grant an interview after final rejection?
An examiner will grant an interview after final rejection if they believe it can lead to a resolution with minimal additional consideration. According to MPEP 713.09: Such an interview may be granted if the examiner is convinced that disposal or clarification for appeal may be accomplished with only nominal further consideration. This means the examiner…
Read MoreHow does a 37 CFR 1.130(b) declaration of prior public disclosure differ from a 1.130(a) declaration?
A 37 CFR 1.130(b) declaration of prior public disclosure serves a different purpose than a 1.130(a) declaration. As outlined in MPEP 717.01(b): Where the disclosure on which the rejection is based is not a U.S. patent or U.S. patent application publication, the applicant or patent owner may, under 37 CFR 1.130(b), establish a prior public…
Read MoreWhat types of interview requests are likely to be denied after final rejection?
Certain types of interview requests are likely to be denied after final rejection. The MPEP 713.09 specifies: Interviews merely to restate arguments of record or to discuss new limitations which would require more than nominal reconsideration or new search should be denied. This means that interviews aimed at rehashing previous arguments or introducing significant new…
Read MoreWhat happens if an amendment under 37 CFR 1.312 is not approved by the examiner?
What happens if an amendment under 37 CFR 1.312 is not approved by the examiner? If an amendment submitted under 37 CFR 1.312 is not approved by the examiner, it will not be entered into the application. According to MPEP 714.16: ‘If the amendment is disapproved by the examiner, the amendment shall be placed in…
Read MoreWho can change the correspondence address in a pre-AIA patent application?
The ability to change the correspondence address in a pre-AIA patent application depends on whether a 37 CFR 1.63 oath or declaration has been filed: If no oath or declaration has been filed, the correspondence address can be changed by: The party who filed the application Any patent practitioner named in the transmittal papers A…
Read MoreHow can patent applicants avoid abandonment of their application?
To avoid abandonment of a patent application, applicants should ensure their responses are completely responsive to the preceding Office action. According to MPEP 714.05: “If found inadequate, and sufficient time remains, applicant should be notified of the deficiencies and warned to complete the reply within the period.” To avoid abandonment, applicants should: Submit responses well…
Read More