How does the written description requirement apply to amended or new claims?
The written description requirement applies not only to original claims but also to amended and new claims introduced during prosecution. The MPEP 2163.01 states: “The fundamental factual inquiry is whether the specification conveys with reasonable clarity to those skilled in the art that, as of the filing date sought, applicant was in possession of the…
Read MoreWhen should information be disclosed to the USPTO during patent prosecution?
Information should be submitted promptly to the USPTO during patent prosecution. The MPEP states: An applicant, attorney, or agent who is aware of material prior art or other information and its significance should submit the information as early as possible in prosecution, e.g., before the first Office action, and not wait until after allowance. However,…
Read MoreWhat is prosecution laches in patent law?
Prosecution laches is a legal doctrine that can result in the forfeiture of patent rights due to unreasonable and undue delay in prosecution. The Federal Circuit affirmed this principle in In re Bogese, stating: “[Applicant] filed twelve continuation applications over an eight-year period and did not substantively advance prosecution when required and given an opportunity…
Read MoreHow does timely disclosure of information affect patent validity?
Timely disclosure of information can significantly affect patent validity. The MPEP states: The presumption of validity is generally strong when prior art was before and considered by the Office and weak when it was not. This means that when relevant information is disclosed promptly and considered by the USPTO during examination, the resulting patent is…
Read MoreHow does a successful appeal affect patent term adjustment?
A successful appeal can result in additional patent term adjustment (PTA). According to MPEP 2731: “37 CFR 1.703(e) pertains to the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 154(b)(1)(C)(iii) and indicates that the period of adjustment under 37 CFR 1.702(e) is the sum of the number of days, if any, in the period beginning on the date on…
Read MoreWhat is considered ‘substantive involvement’ in a patent application?
The MPEP doesn’t provide a precise definition of ‘substantive involvement’, but it does offer guidance on who is considered substantively involved in the preparation or prosecution of a patent application. According to 37 CFR 1.56(c), this includes: “Every other person who is substantively involved in the preparation or prosecution of the application and who is…
Read MoreHow do secrecy orders affect patent term adjustment?
Secrecy orders can have a significant impact on patent term adjustment (PTA). According to MPEP 2731, there are several ways in which a secrecy order can affect PTA: “37 CFR 1.703(d) pertains to the provisions of 35 U.S.C. 154(b)(1)(C)(ii) and indicates that the period of adjustment under 37 CFR 1.702(d) is the sum of the…
Read MoreHow does a restriction requirement affect biological deposit obligations?
A restriction requirement can impact biological deposit obligations in patent applications. The MPEP 2411.01 provides guidance on this situation: “In the event of a restriction requirement, all claims requiring a deposit must be limited to the elected subject matter that relates to the deposit.” This means that if a restriction requirement is made, and the…
Read MoreHow can an applicant resolve ambiguities in functional limitations?
The MPEP provides several ways an applicant can resolve ambiguities in functional limitations during prosecution: Use a quantitative metric instead of a qualitative functional feature. For example, include a numeric limitation for a physical property. Demonstrate that the specification provides a formula for calculating a property, along with examples that meet and do not meet…
Read MoreHow does res judicata apply in patent law?
Res judicata in patent law prevents patent owners or applicants from seeking claims that are not patentably distinct from claims previously refused or canceled during administrative trials or federal court proceedings. According to MPEP 2190: “A patent owner or applicant may be precluded from seeking a claim that is not patentably distinct from a claim…
Read More