Can an examiner’s objection to unlabeled prior art figures be held in abeyance?

Question

Accepted Answer

Source: FAQ (MPEP-Based) BlueIron Update: 2024-09-09 10 Rules 5 Related FAQs This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice. No, an examiner’s objection to unlabeled prior art figures cannot be held in abeyance. The MPEP 608.02(g) clearly states that The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance. This means that the applicant must address the objection in their response to the Office action. Failure to correct the labeling of prior art figures as requested may lead to further complications in the patent prosecution process, potentially including abandonment of the application if not addressed in a timely manner. Related Rules from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 10 rules Collapse Unlabeled Prior Art Figure May Use Form 6.36.01 MPEP 608.02(g) Permitted Prior Art Figures May Be Retained If Needed MPEP 608.02(g) Recommended Full and Clear Disclosure Required for Patent MPEP 608 Required Requirement for Full and Clear Disclosure MPEP 608 Claims Must Find Basis in Original Disclosure MPEP 608 Required No New Matter After Filing Date MPEP 608 Permitted Original Disclosure Requirement for Filing MPEP 608 Permitted Examiner Must Object to Offensive Language and Depictions in Patent Applications MPEP 608 Recommended Language and Drawings Must Be Resolved Before Publication MPEP 608 Recommended Requirement for Design Application Practice MPEP 608 Other Related FAQs 5 FAQs Collapse When should prior art figures be included in a patent application? What is the correct procedure for submitting corrected drawings in response to a prior art figure objection? How should prior art figures be labeled in a patent application? What happens if prior art figures are not properly labeled in a patent application? Who is responsible for pointing out and distinctly claiming the invention in a patent application?