What is the time limit for filing a foreign priority claim in international design applications?
The time limit for filing a foreign priority claim in international design applications is specified in 35 U.S.C. 119(a) and 172, and 37 CFR 1.55(b)(1). According to MPEP 2920.05(d): “Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 119(a) and 172, and 37 CFR 1.55(b)(1), the nonprovisional international design application must be filed not later than six months after the…
Read MoreWhat is the time limit for filing an appeal in an inter partes reexamination proceeding?
According to MPEP 2683, the time limit for filing an appeal in an inter partes reexamination proceeding is specified in 37 CFR 1.304(a)(1): “The time for filing the notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (§ 1.302) or for commencing a civil action (§ 1.303) is two months from…
Read MoreWhat is the time limit for correcting a noncompliant supplemental examination request?
What is the time limit for correcting a noncompliant supplemental examination request? The time limit for correcting a noncompliant supplemental examination request is typically 30 days from the mailing date of the notice of noncompliance. This is specified in MPEP 2812.02: “The patent owner will be given a time period of 30 days or one…
Read MoreWhat is the time limit for claiming benefit of a prior-filed application in an international design application?
The time limit for claiming benefit of a prior-filed application in an international design application is specified in MPEP 2920.05(e): “The right of priority may be restored where the international design application is filed after the expiration of the priority period but within a period of two months from the expiration of the priority period.”…
Read MoreWhat is the time frame for inter partes reexamination proceedings?
Inter partes reexamination proceedings are designed to be conducted with “special dispatch” to ensure timely resolution. According to MPEP 2609: Decision on the request must be made not later than three months from its filing date, and the remainder of proceedings must proceed with “special dispatch” within the Office; This means that the USPTO must…
Read MoreWhat is the time frame for adding a required claim for interference?
When an examiner requires an applicant to add a claim for interference, there is a specific time frame that must be followed. According to 37 CFR 41.202(c): “Failure to satisfy the requirement within a period (not less than one month) the examiner sets will operate as a concession of priority for the subject matter of…
Read MoreHow are requests for extensions of time after Action Closing Prosecution (ACP) handled?
Requests for extensions of time after Action Closing Prosecution (ACP) in inter partes reexamination are handled with caution, especially when related to submitting affidavits. Key points include: Granting an extension does not guarantee acceptance of the affidavit. Examiners may question why the affidavit was not presented earlier. Insufficient showings may result in denial of affidavit…
Read MoreCan the time limit for completing an incomplete ex parte reexamination request be extended?
The time limit for completing an incomplete ex parte reexamination request can be extended, but only under specific circumstances: Extensions may be granted for sufficient cause if requested in a timely manner. The request for extension must be filed within the original time period for completing the request. Extensions are granted at the discretion of…
Read MoreHow do time and expense factor into the assessment of undue experimentation?
Time and expense are considerations in assessing undue experimentation, but they are not determinative factors on their own. The MPEP provides guidance on this in section 2164.06: “Time and expense are merely factors in this consideration and are not the controlling factors.” Key points to consider: Extensive time or high costs don’t automatically make experimentation…
Read MoreWhat are the threshold requirements for clarity and precision in patent claims?
The threshold requirements for clarity and precision in patent claims are set forth in 35 U.S.C. 112(b). The MPEP emphasizes: “The examiner’s focus during examination of claims for compliance with the requirement for definiteness of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is whether the claim meets the threshold requirements of clarity…
Read More