Question: What actions should happen if an examiner discovers new matter in a substitute or additional drawing? Answer: If the examiner discovers new matter in a substitute or additional drawing, the drawing should not be entered and the examiner should describe the new matter that resulted in non-entry in the next Office action. A new […]

The post MPEP Q & A 275: Receipt of drawing after the filing date appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: During what conditions would the complete file wrapper and contents of a patent application published in redacted form not be available? Answer: If an application was published in redacted form, the complete file wrapper and contents of the patent application will not be available if: The requirements of paragraphs (d)(1), (d)(2), and (d)(3) of […]

The post MPEP Q & A 274: Inspection of patent files by the public appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: Can a request for ex parte reexamination filed on or after January 16, 2018 be filed with a reduced filing fee? Answer: Yes, requests for ex parte reexamination filed on or after January 16, 2018 may be filed with a reduced filing fee. This reexamination filing option was created to make it financially less burdensome for requesters […]

The post MPEP Q & A 273: Can a request for ex parte reexamination filed on or after January 16, 2018 be filed with a reduced filing fee? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: Name a limitation that the courts have found not to be enough to qualify as “significantly more” when recited in a claim with a judicial exception. Answer: Limitations that the courts have found not to be enough to qualify as “significantly more” when recited in a claim with a judicial exception include: Adding the […]

The post MPEP Q & A 272: Limitation that the courts have found not to be enough to qualify as “significantly more” when recited in a claim with a judicial exception. appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: What are three pieces of information each patent listed in the Official Gazette may give? Answer: As to each patent listed in the Official Gazette, the following information may be given: (A) Patent number; (B) Title of the invention; (C) Name of inventor(s), city, and state or country of residence; (D) Assignee’s name, city, […]

The post MPEP Q & A 271: What are three pieces of information each patent listed in the Official Gazette may give? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: Once an appellant has filed a notice of appeal, what situations may that appellant request that prosecution be reopened for? Answer: Once appellant has filed a notice of appeal, appellant also may request that prosecution be reopened for the following situations: In response to a new ground of rejection made in an examiner’s answer, […]

The post MPEP Q & A 270: Once an appellant has filed a notice of appeal, what situations may that appellant request that prosecution be reopened for? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: List two laboratory techniques the courts have recognized as well-understood, routine, conventional activities in the life science arts when they are claimed in a merely generic manner (e.g., at a high level of generality) or as insignificant extra-solution activity. Answer: The courts have recognized the following laboratory techniques as well-understood, routine, conventional activity in the […]

The post MPEP Q & A 269: Two laboratory techniques the courts have recognized as well-understood, routine, conventional activities in the life science arts appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: If the Board affirms a rejection against independent claim 1, reverses all rejections against dependent claim 2 and claim 3 is allowed, after expiration of the period for further appeal, what should the examiner do? Answer: If the Board affirms a rejection against independent claim 1, reverses all rejections against dependent claim 2 and […]

The post MPEP Q & A 268: What should the examiner do? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: What are the four purposes 35 U.S.C. 101 has been interpreted as imposing? Answer: 35 U.S.C. 101 has been interpreted as imposing four purposes. First, 35 U.S.C. 101 limits an inventor to ONE patent for a claimed invention. If more than one patent is sought, a patent applicant will receive a statutory double patenting […]

The post MPEP Q & A 267: What are the four purposes 35 U.S.C. 101 has been interpreted as imposing? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Question: Name one advantage a CPA has compared to a continuation or divisional application filed under 37 CFR 1.53(b). Answer: A CPA has a number of advantages compared to a continuation or divisional application filed under 37 CFR 1.53(b). For example, the papers required to be filed in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in […]

The post MPEP Q & A 266: Name one advantage a CPA has compared to a continuation or divisional application appeared first on Patent Education Series.