What is considered a valid mailing address for inventors in patent applications?
The MPEP provides guidance on what constitutes a valid mailing address for inventors in patent applications. According to MPEP 602.08(a): “The inventor’s mailing address means that address at which he or she customarily receives his or her mail, even if it is not the main mailing address of the inventor. Either the inventor’s home or…
Read MoreCan an applicant withdraw email communication authorization with the USPTO?
Yes, an applicant can withdraw their authorization for email communication with the USPTO. According to MPEP 502.03: ‘A written authorization may be withdrawn by filing a signed paper clearly identifying the original authorization.’ The USPTO provides a sample form for withdrawing authorization: ‘The authorization given on______, to the USPTO to communicate with any practitioner of…
Read MoreHow does withdrawal affect the correspondence address for a patent application?
When a practitioner withdraws and the correspondence address will change as a result, the withdrawing practitioner(s) must request that the USPTO direct all future correspondence to one of the following: The first named inventor or assignee that has properly made itself of record (for applications filed before September 16, 2012) The applicant (for applications filed…
Read MoreWhat is the correspondence address in a patent application?
The correspondence address in a patent application is the address where the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will send all official communications regarding the application. According to 37 CFR 1.33(a): “When filing an application, a correspondence address must be set forth in either an application data sheet (§ 1.76), or elsewhere, in a…
Read MoreHow is correspondence handled when two patent practitioners are appointed?
When two patent practitioners are appointed, the handling of correspondence depends on how and when they were appointed. According to MPEP 403.02: “If, after one patent practitioner is appointed, a second patent practitioner is later added by submission of a new power of attorney appointing both practitioners, correspondence will be mailed to the latest correspondence…
Read MoreIs a daytime telephone number required when submitting a patent application?
While not strictly required, the USPTO requests the submission of a daytime telephone number for the party to whom correspondence is to be addressed. According to 37 CFR 1.33(a): For the party to whom correspondence is to be addressed, a daytime telephone number should be supplied in a clearly identifiable manner and may be changed…
Read MoreIs a daytime telephone number required in patent applications?
While not strictly required, the USPTO recommends providing a daytime telephone number in patent applications. According to MPEP 601.03(b): “The submission of a daytime telephone number of the party to whom correspondence is to be addressed is requested pursuant to pre-AIA 37 CFR 1.33(a).” The MPEP further explains: “While business is to be conducted on…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of MPEP ¶ 2.32 in relation to Continued Prosecution Applications?
MPEP ¶ 2.32 provides guidance for patent examiners on how to respond to requests for deleting a named inventor in a Continued Prosecution Application (CPA) for design patents. The paragraph serves several purposes: It offers a template for examiners to acknowledge receipt of a statement requesting inventor deletion. It confirms that the inventorship has been…
Read MoreWhat is the purpose of Form Paragraph 2.38 in the MPEP regarding non-English provisional applications?
Form Paragraph 2.38 in the MPEP serves several important purposes regarding non-English provisional applications: It notifies the applicant that an English translation and/or a statement of translation accuracy is required for a non-English language provisional application. It informs the applicant about the specific documents that are missing from their application. It provides clear instructions on…
Read MoreWhat happens when one of multiple practitioners of record is suspended?
When one of multiple practitioners of record is suspended, the USPTO continues to communicate with the remaining unsuspended practitioners. MPEP § 407 provides guidance for this situation: “This form paragraph should be used when there is at least one registered practitioner still of record who has not been suspended or excluded from practice.” The Office…
Read More