What are the consequences of a lack of unity of invention in a PCT application?
When a lack of unity of invention is found in a PCT application, there can be several consequences, as outlined in MPEP 1893.03(d): Additional Fees: The applicant may be required to pay additional fees to have all inventions searched and examined. Limited Examination: If additional fees are not paid, the examination may be limited to…
Read MoreHow does Box No. VIII address unity of invention in the Written Opinion?
How does Box No. VIII address unity of invention in the Written Opinion? Box No. VIII in the Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority addresses the important concept of unity of invention in patent applications. According to MPEP 1845, “Box No. VIII is used to indicate a lack of unity of invention.” Key aspects…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of Box No. IV in the International Preliminary Examination Report?
Box No. IV in the International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER) addresses the issue of unity of invention. According to MPEP 1879: “Box No. IV is to be completed if the examiner found that the requirement of unity of invention is not fulfilled.” The purpose of Box No. IV is to: Indicate whether the requirement of…
Read More