What are the WIPO ST.26 requirements for applications filed on or after July 1, 2022?
The MPEP 2422.06 section includes an important editor’s note regarding applications filed on or after July 1, 2022: “[Editor Note: This section is not applicable to applications filed on or after July 1, 2022, having disclosures of nucleotide and/or amino acid sequences as defined in 37 CFR 1.831(b). See MPEP §§ 2412 – 2419 for…
Read MoreWho is subject to the duty of disclosure in patent term extension proceedings?
The duty of disclosure in patent term extension proceedings applies to a wide range of individuals involved in the process. According to MPEP 2762: “A duty of candor and good faith toward the USPTO, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Secretary of Agriculture rests on the patent owner or its agent, on…
Read MoreWho is responsible for disclosing information to the USPTO?
According to MPEP 2002.01, the responsibility for disclosing information to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) can fall on several parties: Attorneys or agents of record Pro se inventors (inventors representing themselves) Other individuals who disclose information to the attorney, agent, or inventor The MPEP states: “37 CFR 1.56(d) makes clear that information…
Read MoreWho processes requests for supplemental examination?
According to MPEP 2812, requests for supplemental examination are processed by the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) of the USPTO. The MPEP states: “All processing of requests for supplemental examination and of other papers filed in a supplemental examination proceeding and in any resulting ex parte reexamination proceeding will be performed by the staff of the…
Read MoreWho processes reexamination requests in the USPTO?
Reexamination requests are processed by designated personnel in the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) or Technology Centers (TCs). According to MPEP 2233: “The working groups in the Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) or Technology Centers (TCs) have designated the legal instrument examiners and paralegals to act as reexamination clerks, as part of their assigned duties, and thus…
Read MoreWho owes the duty of disclosure to the USPTO?
The duty of disclosure is owed by all individuals associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application. This includes inventors, patent attorneys, and anyone else involved in the patent application process. According to MPEP 2001.03, “37 CFR 1.56(a) states that the ‘duty of candor and good faith’ is owed ‘in dealing with the…
Read MoreWho has the duty to disclose information to the USPTO?
The duty to disclose information to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) applies to various individuals involved in the patent application process. While the specific MPEP section provided doesn’t elaborate on this, it’s generally understood that this duty extends to: Inventors Patent attorneys or agents representing the applicant Anyone substantively involved in the…
Read MoreWho has the duty of disclosure in reexamination proceedings?
According to MPEP 2014, the individuals who have a duty of disclosure in reexamination proceedings are: The patent owner Each attorney or agent representing the patent owner Every other individual who is substantively involved on behalf of the patent owner in the reexamination proceeding As stated in 37 CFR 1.555(a): “The individuals who have a…
Read MoreWho has a duty to disclose information material to patentability?
According to 37 CFR 1.56, individuals associated with the filing and prosecution of a patent application have a duty to disclose information material to patentability. This includes: The inventor(s) Each attorney or agent who prepares or prosecutes the application Every other person who is substantively involved in the preparation or prosecution of the application The…
Read MoreWho declares and administers an interference proceeding?
The declaration and administration of an interference proceeding involve multiple parties within the USPTO. According to MPEP 2301: “Once an interference has been suggested under 37 CFR 41.202, the examiner refers the suggested interference to the Board. An administrative patent judge declares the interference, which is then administered at the Board.” Specifically: The examiner initially…
Read More