What happens if the USPTO can’t contact the patent owner during reexamination?
If the USPTO cannot deliver mail to the patent owner due to lack of a current address, and all efforts to correspond fail, the reexamination proceeding will continue without actual notice to the patent owner. In such cases, the USPTO provides constructive notice through publication in the Official Gazette. As stated in MPEP 2230: “The…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO handle confidentiality of sequence data in pending applications?
The USPTO maintains strict confidentiality of sequence data in pending applications, in compliance with 35 U.S.C. 122. The MPEP clarifies: It should be noted that the Office’s database complies with the confidentiality requirement imposed by 35 U.S.C. 122. Unpublished pending application sequences are maintained in the database separately from published or patented sequences. That is,…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO handle confidentiality in material fraud cases?
How does the USPTO handle confidentiality in material fraud cases? The USPTO treats potential material fraud cases with strict confidentiality. According to MPEP 2819: “In order to preserve the confidentiality of any investigation… the employee or program should not discuss the matter with any other employees not having a need to know the information.” This…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO handle concurrent reexamination and interference proceedings?
When reexamination and interference proceedings are concurrent, the USPTO follows specific guidelines to manage both processes. According to MPEP 2686.04: “If a reexamination proceeding is ordered while an interference proceeding is pending, the reexamination proceeding is suspended until the interference proceeding is terminated at the interference level (i.e., the interference is terminated as to the…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO distinguish between improvements to computer functionality and mere automation of manual processes?
The USPTO distinguishes between improvements to computer functionality and mere automation of manual processes by examining the technical nature of the improvement. According to MPEP 2106.04(d)(1): “[I]f the specification explicitly sets forth an improvement but in a conclusory manner (i.e., a bare assertion of an improvement without the detail necessary to be apparent to a…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO communicate with third-party requesters in inter partes reexamination?
The USPTO uses specific forms to communicate with third-party requesters in inter partes reexamination proceedings. According to MPEP 2696, the primary form for this purpose is: PTOL-2070: Transmittal of Communication to Third Party Requester – Inter Partes Reexamination This form ensures that third-party requesters receive relevant communications throughout the reexamination process, maintaining transparency and allowing…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO handle claim amendments during copending reexamination and interference?
How does the USPTO handle claim amendments during copending reexamination and interference? The USPTO handles claim amendments carefully during copending reexamination and interference proceedings: Claim amendments in reexamination that affect claims involved in the interference require special consideration. The Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) must consult with the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) before…
Read MoreWhat are the specific categories of abstract ideas recognized by the USPTO?
The USPTO recognizes four main categories of abstract ideas: Mathematical concepts: Including mathematical relationships, formulas, equations, and calculations. Certain methods of organizing human activity: Such as fundamental economic principles, commercial interactions, and managing personal behavior or relationships. Mental processes: Concepts performed in the human mind, including observation, evaluation, judgment, and opinion. Other abstract ideas: Ideas…
Read MoreWhy does the USPTO use the broadest reasonable interpretation standard?
The USPTO uses the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard during patent examination for several important reasons. According to MPEP 2111: “Because applicant has the opportunity to amend the claims during prosecution, giving a claim its broadest reasonable interpretation will reduce the possibility that the claim, once issued, will be interpreted more broadly than is justified.”…
Read MoreHow does the USPTO determine the basis for each issue in supplemental examination?
The USPTO determines the basis for each issue in supplemental examination by carefully analyzing the submitted information and its relevance to the patent. According to MPEP 2816.03: “The determination should provide an explanation of the basis for the determination for each issue identified as raising a substantial new question of patentability.” The process typically involves:…
Read More