What is the time frame for the USPTO to determine if a Substantial New Question (SNQ) of patentability is raised in a supplemental examination request?

According to MPEP 2816, the USPTO is required to make a determination within three months following the filing date of a request for supplemental examination. Specifically, the MPEP states: “35 U.S.C. 257(a) and 37 CFR 1.620(b) require that, within three months following the filing date of a request for supplemental examination, the Office will determine…

Read More

How does the USPTO conclude a supplemental examination proceeding?

A supplemental examination proceeding concludes with the issuance of a specific document. According to MPEP 2815: “A supplemental examination proceeding concludes with the issuance of a supplemental examination certificate, indicating the results of the examiner’s determination.” This certificate serves as the official record of the examiner’s determination regarding whether a substantial new question of patentability…

Read More

What is the USPTO’s stance on rejecting patent claims for “aggregation”?

According to the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) 2173.05(k), patent claims should not be rejected on the grounds of “aggregation.” The MPEP states: “A claim should not be rejected on the ground of ‘aggregation.’” This guidance is based on legal precedents, including In re Gustafson and In re Collier, which established that rejections for…

Read More

How does the USPTO handle the timing of reexamination proceedings?

The USPTO is required to conduct reexamination proceedings with special dispatch. MPEP 2821 references 35 U.S.C. 305, which states: “Reexamination will be conducted with special dispatch within the Office.“ This requirement ensures that reexamination proceedings are handled promptly and efficiently. The MPEP also cites the case of Ethicon v. Quigg, 849 F.2d 1422 (Fed. Cir.…

Read More

What standard does the USPTO use to determine if an item of information raises a Substantial New Question (SNQ) of patentability in a supplemental examination?

The USPTO uses the same standard for determining whether an item of information raises a Substantial New Question (SNQ) of patentability in supplemental examination as it does for ex parte reexaminations. According to MPEP 2816: “The standard for determining whether an item of information properly submitted as part of the request raises a SNQ will…

Read More

How do the Sequence Rules relate to WIPO Standard ST.26?

The USPTO Sequence Rules are closely aligned with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Standard ST.26. MPEP 2412.01 states that the XML file of the sequence information must conform to requirements that “specify requirements of particular paragraphs of WIPO Standard ST.26.” WIPO Standard ST.26 is an international standard for the presentation of nucleotide and amino…

Read More