How does the USPTO evaluate petitions for stay in patent term extension applications?
The USPTO evaluates petitions for stay in patent term extension applications based on the standard of “good and sufficient cause.” According to MPEP 2765: “The standard for granting requests under both 37 CFR 1.103 and 37 CFR 1.314 is good and sufficient cause.” The USPTO considers several factors when evaluating these petitions: The nature and…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate rebuttal evidence for obviousness rejections?
The USPTO evaluates rebuttal evidence for obviousness rejections by considering all relevant evidence and weighing it appropriately. As stated in MPEP 2145: “Office personnel should not evaluate rebuttal evidence for its ‘knockdown’ value against the prima facie case, Piasecki, 745 F.2d at 1473, 223 USPQ at 788, or summarily dismiss it as not compelling or…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the use of prior art in computer programming patent applications?
The USPTO carefully evaluates the use of prior art in computer programming patent applications, particularly in relation to enablement. Key points from the MPEP include: Commercial availability of identified prior art computer systems is very pertinent to enablement. Citing technical publications or prior art patents alone may not be sufficient to satisfy the enablement requirement.…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO handle predictable versus unpredictable arts in written description evaluations?
How does the USPTO handle predictable versus unpredictable arts in written description evaluations? The USPTO’s approach to evaluating written descriptions differs between predictable and unpredictable arts. According to MPEP 2163.02: “The level of detail required to satisfy the written description requirement varies depending on the nature and scope of the claims and on the complexity…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate functional claim language?
The USPTO evaluates functional claim language based on several factors outlined in MPEP 2173.05(g). These factors include: Whether the specification provides a clear and definite description of the claimed function Whether one skilled in the art would understand the bounds of the claim when read in light of the specification Whether the claim provides clear…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate improvements to technology in patent eligibility?
The USPTO evaluates improvements to technology as part of the practical application analysis in Step 2A Prong Two of the patent eligibility test. This evaluation involves two key steps: Examining the specification to determine if it provides sufficient details about the improvement. Ensuring the claim reflects the disclosed improvement. As stated in the MPEP: “First…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate claims of improved computer functionality in patent applications?
The USPTO evaluates claims of improved computer functionality in patent applications by considering whether the claimed invention provides a technical improvement to the computer itself or to another technology. According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(1): “[T]he claim must be evaluated to ensure the claim itself reflects the disclosed improvement in technology… That is, the claim must include…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the level of experimentation required for an invention?
The USPTO evaluates the level of experimentation required for an invention as part of the enablement assessment. According to MPEP 2164.01(a), this evaluation considers whether the experimentation needed is “undue.” The MPEP states: “The determination that ‘undue experimentation’ would have been needed to make and use the claimed invention is not a single, simple factual…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate the credibility of an asserted utility?
The USPTO evaluates the credibility of an asserted utility based on the presumption that an applicant’s assertion of utility is true, unless there is reason to doubt it. The MPEP states: As a matter of Patent Office practice, a specification which contains a disclosure of utility which corresponds in scope to the subject matter sought…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO evaluate improvements to computer functionality?
The USPTO evaluates improvements to computer functionality by determining whether the claim purports to improve computer capabilities or invokes computers merely as a tool. According to the MPEP: “In computer-related technologies, the examiner should determine whether the claim purports to improve computer capabilities or, instead, invokes computers merely as a tool.” The evaluation involves analyzing…
Read More