What is the significance of the ‘reasonable explanation’ requirement in 37 CFR 1.130(a) declarations?
The ‘reasonable explanation’ requirement in 37 CFR 1.130(a) declarations is crucial for establishing the credibility and sufficiency of the declaration. MPEP 717.01(a)(1) states: The ‘reasonable explanation’ requirement of 37 CFR 1.130(a) provides the USPTO with the means to obtain additional information regarding the disclosure and to ensure that the patent application satisfies the statutory requirement…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a)?
An affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a) serves to overcome a cited prior art reference by establishing that the inventor(s) completed the invention before the effective date of the reference. The MPEP states: ‘The purpose of a 37 CFR 1.131(a) affidavit or declaration is to overcome a prior art rejection under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a)?
An affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a) serves the purpose of overcoming a prior art reference by establishing that the inventor completed the invention before the effective date of the reference. This is commonly known as ‘swearing behind’ a reference. The MPEP states: ‘The purpose of a 37 CFR 1.131(a) affidavit or declaration is…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a)?
The purpose of an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a) is to overcome a prior art reference by establishing that the inventor(s) completed the invention before the effective date of the reference. This is commonly known as ‘swearing behind’ a reference. According to MPEP 715: The purpose of a 37 CFR 1.131(a) affidavit or…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of a 37 CFR 1.131(a) affidavit or declaration?
The purpose of a 37 CFR 1.131(a) affidavit or declaration is to overcome a prior art rejection under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 or 103. This is done by proving invention of the claimed subject matter by the inventor or at least one joint inventor prior to the effective date of the reference or activity relied…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a)?
An affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131(a) serves to establish that the inventor or at least one joint inventor had possession of the subject matter of the rejected claim before the effective date of the reference or activity on which the rejection is based. The MPEP states: ‘The purpose of a 37 CFR 1.131(a)…
Read MoreHow does a primary examiner guide a new assistant in applying prior art rejections?
A primary examiner plays a crucial role in guiding new assistant examiners on applying prior art rejections. According to MPEP 707.01: “If action on the merits is to be given and claims rejected, the primary examiner may indicate how the references are to be applied in any prior art rejection and explain the basis for…
Read MoreHow do examiners handle applications where common ownership or a joint research agreement has not been established?
According to MPEP 717.02(c), when examining applications where common ownership or a joint research agreement has not been established, examiners will: Assume the subject matter disclosed in the reference is not excepted under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) Examine the application on all grounds other than the possible exception Consider the applicability of references under 35 U.S.C.…
Read MoreHow can an inventor overcome a rejection based on their own published work?
An inventor can overcome a rejection based on their own published work by showing that the publication was made by the inventor, at least one joint inventor, or on their behalf. This can be done through an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.132. As stated in MPEP 715.01(c): Unless it is a statutory bar,…
Read MoreHow can an applicant overcome prior art rejections using a 37 CFR 1.132 affidavit?
An applicant can overcome certain prior art rejections using a 37 CFR 1.132 affidavit by proving that the subject matter relied upon in the reference or activity was the inventor’s or at least one joint inventor’s own invention. This is particularly useful in situations where the reference qualifies as prior art only under specific sections…
Read More