Who has the authority to order reexamination at the Director’s initiative?

The authority to order reexamination at the Director’s initiative is delegated to specific high-ranking officials within the USPTO. According to MPEP 2239: “Authority to order reexamination at the Director’s initiative has been delegated to the Deputy Commissioner for Patents who oversees the Office of Petitions. A decision to order reexamination at the Director’s initiative may…

Read More

What is the statutory authority for the patent classification system?

The statutory authority for establishing and maintaining the patent classification system is provided in 35 U.S.C. 8. According to MPEP 903.01, this statute states: “The Director may revise and maintain the classification by subject matter of United States letters patent, and such other patents and printed publications as may be necessary or practicable, for the…

Read More

Who has the authority to decide petitions in patent applications?

The authority to decide petitions in patent applications is delegated to various officials within the USPTO. According to MPEP 1002.02, “The Director of the USPTO may delegate any of their functions to subordinate officials. The various delegations to various Office officials are set forth in this section.” The specific officials and their delegated authorities are…

Read More

What is the legal basis for the USPTO’s authority to require information?

The USPTO’s authority to require information during patent examination is rooted in statutory law. According to MPEP 704.10: The authority for the Office to make such requirements arises from the statutory requirements of examination pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 131 and 132. Specifically: 35 U.S.C. 131 requires the USPTO to examine applications and issue patents when…

Read More

What is the scope of the USPTO’s authority to require information under 37 CFR 1.105?

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has broad authority to require information under 37 CFR 1.105. The MPEP cites a court case that clarifies this authority: “See, e.g., Star Fruits S.N.C. v. United States, 280 F.Supp.2d 512, 515-16 (E.D. Va 2003)(“Beyond that which a patent applicant is duty-bound to disclose pursuant to 37…

Read More