| Recent Notices of Rulemaking |
Referenced Items (190, 191, 192) |
(190) DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Patent and Trademark Office
37 CFR Part 1
[Docket No.: PTO-P-2009-0049]
RIN 0651-AC36
Changes to Practice for Continued Examination Filings,
Patent Applications Containing Patentably Indistinct Claims,
and Examination of Claims in Patent Applications
AGENCY: United States Patent and Trademark Office, Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) published a
final rule in the Federal Register in August of 2007 to revise the rules of
practice for patent cases pertaining to continuing applications and
requests for continued examination practices, and for the examination of
claims in patent applications (Claims and Continuations Final Rule). The
Office is revising the rules of practice in this final rule to remove the
changes in the Claims and Continuations Final Rule from the Code of Federal
Regulations.
DATES: Effective Date: October 14, 2009.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert W. Bahr, Senior Patent Counsel,
Office of the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, by
telephone at (571) 272-8800; or by mail addressed to: Mail Stop Comments
Patents, Commissioner for Patents, P.O. Box 1450, Alexandria, VA
22313-1450.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Office published the Claims and
Continuations Final Rule in the Federal Register in August of 2007, which
revised the rules of practice in title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations for patent cases pertaining to continuing applications and
requests for continued examination practices, and for the examination of
claims in patent applications. See Changes to Practice for Continued
Examination Filings, Patent Applications Containing Patentably Indistinct
Claims, and Examination of Claims in Patent Applications, 72 FR 46716
(Aug. 21, 2007), 1322 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 76 (Sept. 11, 2007). The United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (District Court)
issued an injunction, enjoining the Office from implementing the changes in
the Claims and Continuations Final Rule. See Tafas v. Dudas, 541 F. Supp.
2d 805, 86 U.S.P.Q.2d 1623 (E.D. Va. 2008) (permanent injunction), and
Tafas v. Dudas, 511 F. Supp. 2d 652, 86 U.S.P.Q.2d 1548 (E.D. Va. 2007)
(preliminary injunction). The Office appealed this decision to the United
States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit). The
Federal Circuit issued a panel decision holding that all of the changes in
the Claims and Continuations Final Rule fall within the Office's rule
making authority to govern the conduct of proceedings before the Office,
but that the provisions pertaining to continuing applications were
inconsistent with 35 U.S.C. 120. See Tafas v. Doll, 559 F.3d 1345, 90
U.S.P.Q.2d 1129 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Federal Circuit en banc then issued
an order granting a petition for rehearing en banc and vacating the panel
decision. See Tafas v. Doll, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 14611, 91 U.S.P.Q. 2d
1153 (Fed. Cir., July 6, 2009).
The changes in the Claims and Continuations Final Rule were added to the
Code of Federal Regulations, but have been the subject of litigation since
August of 2007 and have never taken effect. See Clarification of Patent
Regulations Currently in Effect, and Revision in Applicability Date of
Provisions Relating to Patent Applications Containing Patentably Indistinct
Claims, 73 FR 45999 (Aug. 7, 2008) (notice). The changes in the Claims and
Continuations Final Rule addressed the Office's patent application pendency
and quality issues, but did so with provisions that were objectionable to a
 Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1007 |
large segment of the patent user community. In addition, the circumstances
have changed since the Office published the Claims and Continuations Final
Rule in August of 2007, and the Office is now considering other initiatives
that would garner more of a consensus with the patent user community to
address the challenges it currently faces. Thus, the Office has decided
that it is no longer interested in pursuing the changes in the Claims and
Continuations Final Rule that were the subject of the District Court's
decision in Tafas. Therefore, the Office is revising the rules of practice
in title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations for patent cases to remove
the changes in the Claims and Continuations Final Rule from the Code of
Federal Regulations.
Discussion of Specific Rules
This final rule amends title 37, part 1, of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as follows:
Sections 1.17(f), 1.26(a) and (b), 1.52(d)(2), 1.53(b) and (c)(4),
1.75(b) and (c), 1.76(b)(5), 1.78, 1.104(a)(1) and (b), 1.110, 1.114(a)
and (d), 1.136(a)(1), 1.142(a), 1.145, and 1.495(g) are amended to remove
the changes in these provisions in the Claims and Continuations Final Rule.
Sections 1.105(a)(1)(ix), 1.114(f), (g), and (h), 1.117, 1.142(c), and
1.265, and 1.704(c)(11) are removed. These provisions were added in the
Claims and Continuations Final Rule.
Section 1.704(c)(12) is redesignated as § 1.704(c)(11).
Rule Making Considerations
A. Administrative Procedure Act: The Under Secretary of Commerce for
Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and
Trademark Office finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to waive any
requirement to provide prior notice and opportunity for public comment as
such procedures are unnecessary. The changes in this final rule revise the
rules of practice as published in title 37 of the Code of Federal
Regulations to reflect the rules of practice that are currently in effect.
The changes in this final rule will not result in any changes in the
requirements with which applicants, patentees, or other members of the
public must comply during proceedings before the Office. Therefore, prior
notice and an opportunity for public comment are not required pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(A) or (B) or any other law. In addition, thirty-day advance
publication is not required under 5 U.S.C. 553(d) for this final rule as it
merely relieves restrictions contained in the rules of practice as
published in title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act: As prior notice and an opportunity for
public comment are not required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other law,
neither a regulatory flexibility analysis nor a certification under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) is required. See 5 U.S.C.
603.
C. Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review): This rule
making has been determined to be significant for purposes of Executive
Order 12866 (Sept. 30, 1993).
D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism): This rule making does not contain
policies with federalism implications sufficient to warrant preparation of
a Federalism Assessment under Executive Order 13132 (Aug. 4, 1999).
E. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation): This rule making will
not: (1) Have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes; (2)
impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments; or
(3) preempt Tribal law. Therefore, a Tribal summary impact statement is not
required under Executive Order 13175 (Nov. 6, 2000).
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1008 |
F. Executive Order 13211 (Energy Effects): This rule making is not a
significant energy action under Executive Order 13211 because this rule
making is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. Therefore, a Statement of Energy Effects is
not required under Executive Order 13211 (May 18, 2001).
G. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform): This rule making meets
applicable standards to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and
reduce burden as set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order
12988 (Feb. 5, 1996).
H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of Children): This rule making does
not concern an environmental risk to health or safety that may
disproportionately affect children under Executive Order 13045 (Apr, 21,
1997).
I. Executive Order 12630 (Taking of Private Property): This rule making
will not effect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking
implications under Executive Order 12630 (Mar. 15, 1988).
J. Congressional Review Act: Under the Congressional Review Act
provisions of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the United States Patent and Trademark Office
will submit a report containing this final rule and other required
information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives and the
Comptroller General of the Government Accountability Office. The changes in
this final rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of 100
million dollars or more, a major increase in costs or prices, or
significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment,
productivity, innovation, or the ability of United States-based enterprises
to compete with foreign-based enterprises in domestic and export markets.
Therefore, this final rule is not a "major rule" as defined in 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
K. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995: The changes proposed in this
notice do not involve a Federal intergovernmental mandate that will result
in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the
aggregate, of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or more in any one year, or
a Federal private sector mandate that will result in the expenditure by the
private sector of 100 million dollars (as adjusted) or more in any one
year, and will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments.
Therefore, no actions are necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995. See 2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.
L. National Environmental Policy Act: This rule making will not have any
effect on the quality of environment and is thus categorically excluded
from review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. See 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
M. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act: The requirements of
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of
1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) are inapplicable because this rule making does
not contain provisions which involve the use of technical standards.
N. Paperwork Reduction Act: This final rule involves information
collection requirements which are subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). The collection of information involved in this
final rule has been reviewed and approved by OMB under OMB control number
0651-0031. The United States Patent and Trademark Office is not submitting
an information collection package to OMB for its review and approval
because the changes in this notice do not affect the information collection
requirements associated with the information collection under OMB control
number 0651-0031.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person is required to
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1009 |
respond to nor shall a person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with a collection of information subject to the requirements of the
Paperwork Reduction Act unless that collection of information displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
List of Subjects in 37 CFR Part 1
Administrative practice and procedure, Courts, Freedom of information,
Inventions and patents, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Small
businesses.
. For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 37 CFR part 1 is amended as
follows:
PART 1--RULES OF PRACTICE IN PATENT CASES
. 1. The authority citation for 37 CFR part 1 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 35 U.S.C. 2(b)(2).
. 2. Section 1.17 is amended by revising paragraph (f) to read as follows:
§ 1.17 Patent application and reexamination processing fees.
* * * * *
(f) For filing a petition under one of the following sections which
refers to this paragraph: $400.00.
§ 1.36(a)--for revocation of a power of attorney by fewer than all of
the applicants.
§ 1.53(e)--to accord a filing date.
§ 1.57(a)--to accord a filing date.
§ 1.182--for decision on a question not specifically provided for.
§ 1.183--to suspend the rules.
§ 1.378(e)--for reconsideration of decision on petition refusing to
accept delayed payment of maintenance fee in an expired patent.
§ 1.741(b)--to accord a filing date to an application under § 1.740 for
extension of a patent term.
* * * * *
. 3. Section 1.26 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as
follows:
§ 1.26 Refunds.
(a) The Director may refund any fee paid by mistake or in excess of that
required. A change of purpose after the payment of a fee, such as when a
party desires to withdraw a patent filing for which the fee was paid,
including an application, an appeal, or a request for an oral hearing, will
not entitle a party to a refund of such fee. The Office will not refund
amounts of twenty-five dollars or less unless a refund is specifically
requested, and will not notify the payor of such amounts. If a party paying
a fee or requesting a refund does not provide the banking information
necessary for making refunds by electronic funds transfer (31 U.S.C. 3332
and 31 CFR part 208), or instruct the Office that refunds are to be
credited to a deposit account, the Director may require such information,
or use the banking information on the payment instrument to make a refund.
Any refund of a fee paid by credit card will be by a credit to the credit
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1010 |
card account to which the fee was charged.
(b) Any request for refund must be filed within two years from the date
the fee was paid, except as otherwise provided in this paragraph or in
§ 1.28(a). If the Office charges a deposit account by an amount other than
an amount specifically indicated in an authorization (§ 1.25(b)), any
request for refund based upon such charge must be filed within two years
from the date of the deposit account statement indicating such charge, and
include a copy of that deposit account statement. The time periods set
forth in this paragraph are not extendable.
* * * * *
. 4. Section 1.52 is amended by revising paragraph (d)(2) to read as
follows:
§ 1.52 Language, paper, writing, margins, compact disc specifications.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) Provisional application. If a provisional application is filed in a
language other than English, an English language translation of the
non-English language provisional application will not be required in the
provisional application. See § 1.78(a) for the requirements for claiming
the benefit of such provisional application in a nonprovisional
application.
* * * * *
. 5. Section 1.53 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c)(4) to read
as follows:
§ 1.53 Application number, filing date, and completion of application.
* * * * *
(b) Application filing requirements--Nonprovisional application. The
filing date of an application for patent filed under this section, except
for a provisional application under paragraph (c) of this section or a
continued prosecution application under paragraph (d) of this section, is
the date on which a specification as prescribed by 35 U.S.C. 112 containing
a description pursuant to § 1.71 and at least one claim pursuant to § 1.75,
and any drawing required by § 1.81(a) are filed in the Patent and Trademark
Office. No new matter may be introduced into an application after its
filing date. A continuing application, which may be a continuation,
divisional, or continuation-in-part application, may be filed under the
conditions specified in 35 U.S.C. 120, 121 or 365(c) and § 1.78(a).
(1) A continuation or divisional application that names as inventors the
same or fewer than all of the inventors named in the prior application may
be filed under this paragraph or paragraph (d) of this section.
(2) A continuation-in-part application (which may disclose and claim
subject matter not disclosed in the prior application) or a continuation or
divisional application naming an inventor not named in the prior
application must be filed under this paragraph.
(c) * * *
(4) A provisional application is not entitled to the right of priority
under 35 U.S.C. 119 or 365(a) or § 1.55, or to the benefit of an earlier
filing date under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121 or 365(c) or § 1.78 of any other
application. No claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or § 1.78(a)(4)
may be made in a design application based on a provisional application. No
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1011 |
request under § 1.293 for a statutory invention registration may be filed
in a provisional application. The requirements of §§ 1.821 through 1.825
regarding application disclosures containing nucleotide and/or amino acid
sequences are not mandatory for provisional applications.
* * * * *
. 6. Section 1.75 is amended by revising paragraphs (b) and (c) to read
as follows:
§ 1.75 Claim(s).
* * * * *
(b) More than one claim may be presented provided they differ
substantially from each other and are not unduly multiplied.
(c) One or more claims may be presented in dependent form, referring
back to and further limiting another claim or claims in the same
application. Any dependent claim which refers to more than one other claim
("multiple dependent claim") shall refer to such other claims in the
alternative only. A multiple dependent claim shall not serve as a basis for
any other multiple dependent claim. For fee calculation purposes under
§ 1.16, a multiple dependent claim will be considered to be that number of
claims to which direct reference is made therein. For fee calculation
purposes also, any claim depending from a multiple dependent claim will be
considered to be that number of claims to which direct reference is made in
that multiple dependent claim. In addition to the other filing fees, any
original application which is filed with, or is amended to include,
multiple dependent claims must have paid therein the fee set forth in
§ 1.16(j). Claims in dependent form shall be construed to include all the
limitations of the claim incorporated by reference into the dependent
claim. A multiple dependent claim shall be construed to incorporate by
reference all the limitations of each of the particular claims in relation
to which it is being considered.
* * * * *
. 7. Section 1.76 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(5) to read as
follows:
§ 1.76 Application data sheet.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(5) Domestic priority information. This information includes the
application number, the filing date, the status (including patent number if
available), and relationship of each application for which a benefit is
claimed under 35 U.S.C. 119(e), 120, 121, or 365(c). Providing this
information in the application data sheet constitutes the specific
reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) or 120, and § 1.78(a)(2) or
§ 1.78(a)(5), and need not otherwise be made part of the specification.
* * * * *
. 8. Section 1.78 is revised to read as follows:
§ 1.78 Claiming benefit of earlier filing date and cross-references to
other applications.
(a)(1) A nonprovisional application or international application
designating the United States of America may claim an invention disclosed
in one or more prior-filed copending nonprovisional applications or
international applications designating the United States of America. In
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1012 |
order for an application to claim the benefit of a prior-filed copending
nonprovisional application or international application designating the
United States of America, each prior-filed application must name as an
inventor at least one inventor named in the later-filed application and
disclose the named inventor's invention claimed in at least one claim of
the later-filed application in the manner provided by the first paragraph
of 35 U.S.C. 112. In addition, each prior-filed application must be:
(i) An international application entitled to a filing date in accordance
with PCT Article 11 and designating the United States of America; or
(ii) Entitled to a filing date as set forth in § 1.53(b) or § 1.53(d)
and have paid therein the basic filing fee set forth in § 1.16 within the
pendency of the application.
(2)(i) Except for a continued prosecution application filed under
§ 1.53(d), any nonprovisional application or international application
designating the United States of America claiming the benefit of one or
more prior-filed copending nonprovisional applications or international
applications designating the United States of America must contain or be
amended to contain a reference to each such prior-filed application,
identifying it by application number (consisting of the series code and
serial number) or international application number and international filing
date and indicating the relationship of the applications. Cross references
to other related applications may be made when appropriate (see § 1.14).
(ii) This reference must be submitted during the pendency of the
later-filed application. If the later-filed application is an application
filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a), this reference must also be submitted within
the later of four months from the actual filing date of the later-filed
application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior-filed
application. If the later-filed application is a nonprovisional application
which entered the national stage from an international application after
compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, this reference must also be submitted within
the later of four months from the date on which the national stage
commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f) in the later-filed international
application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior-filed
application. These time periods are not extendable. Except as provided in
paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the failure to timely submit the
reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and paragraph (a)(2)(i) of this section
is considered a waiver of any benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c)
to such prior-filed application. The time periods in this paragraph do not
apply if the later-filed application is:
(A) An application for a design patent;
(B) An application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) before November 29,
2000; or
(C) A nonprovisional application which entered the national stage after
compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371 from an international application filed under
35 U.S.C. 363 before November 29, 2000.
(iii) If the later-filed application is a nonprovisional application,
the reference required by this paragraph must be included in an application
data sheet (§ 1.76), or the specification must contain or be amended to
contain such reference in the first sentence(s) following the title.
(iv) The request for a continued prosecution application under § 1.53(d)
is the specific reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 to the prior-filed
application. The identification of an application by application number
under this section is the identification of every application assigned that
application number necessary for a specific reference required by 35 U.S.C.
120 to every such application assigned that application number.
(3) If the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and paragraph (a)(2) of
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1013 |
this section is presented after the time period provided by paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) of this section, the claim under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c)
for the benefit of a prior-filed copending nonprovisional application or
international application designating the United States of America may be
accepted if the reference identifying the prior-filed application by
application number or international application number and international
filing date was unintentionally delayed. A petition to accept an
unintentionally delayed claim under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, or 365(c) for the
benefit of a prior-filed application must be accompanied by:
(i) The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 120 and paragraph (a)(2) of this
section to the prior-filed application, unless previously submitted;
(ii) The surcharge set forth in § 1.17(t); and
(iii) A statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was
due under paragraph (a)(2)(ii) of this section and the date the claim was
filed was unintentional. The Director may require additional information
where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.
(4) A nonprovisional application, other than for a design patent, or an
international application designating the United States of America may
claim an invention disclosed in one or more prior-filed provisional
applications. In order for an application to claim the benefit of one or
more prior-filed provisional applications, each prior-filed provisional
application must name as an inventor at least one inventor named in the
later-filed application and disclose the named inventor's invention claimed
in at least one claim of the later-filed application in the manner provided
by the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112. In addition, each prior-filed
provisional application must be entitled to a filing date as set forth in
§ 1.53(c), and the basic filing fee set forth in § 1.16(d) must be paid
within the time period set forth in § 1.53(g).
(5)(i) Any nonprovisional application or international application
designating the United States of America claiming the benefit of one or
more prior-filed provisional applications must contain or be amended to
contain a reference to each such prior-filed provisional application,
identifying it by the provisional application number (consisting of series
code and serial number).
(ii) This reference must be submitted during the pendency of the
later-filed application. If the later-filed application is an application
filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a), this reference must also be submitted within
the later of four months from the actual filing date of the later-filed
application or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior-filed
provisional application. If the later-filed application is a nonprovisional
application which entered the national stage from an international
application after compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371, this reference must also
be submitted within the later of four months from the date on which the
national stage commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f) in the later-filed
international application or sixteen months from the filing date of the
prior-filed provisional application. These time periods are not extendable.
Except as provided in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, the failure to
timely submit the reference is considered a waiver of any benefit under 35
U.S.C. 119(e) to such prior-filed provisional application. The time periods
in this paragraph do not apply if the later-filed application is:
(A) An application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) before November 29,
2000; or
(B) A nonprovisional application which entered the national stage after
compliance with 35 U.S.C. 371 from an international application filed under
35 U.S.C. 363 before November 29, 2000.
(iii) If the later-filed application is a nonprovisional application,
the reference required by this paragraph must be included in an application
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1014 |
data sheet (§ 1.76), or the specification must contain or be amended to
contain such reference in the first sentence(s) following the title.
(iv) If the prior-filed provisional application was filed in a language
other than English and both an English-language translation of the
prior-filed provisional application and a statement that the translation is
accurate were not previously filed in the prior-filed provisional
application, applicant will be notified and given a period of time within
which to file, in the prior-filed provisional application, the translation
and the statement. If the notice is mailed in a pending nonprovisional
application, a timely reply to such a notice must include the filing in the
nonprovisional application of either a confirmation that the translation
and statement were filed in the provisional application, or an amendment or
Supplemental Application Data Sheet withdrawing the benefit claim, or the
nonprovisional application will be abandoned. The translation and statement
may be filed in the provisional application, even if the provisional
application has become abandoned.
(6) If the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and paragraph (a)(5)
of this section is presented in a nonprovisional application after the time
period provided by paragraph (a)(5)(ii) of this section, the claim under 35
U.S.C. 119(e) for the benefit of a prior filed provisional application may
be accepted during the pendency of the later-filed application if the
reference identifying the prior-filed application by provisional
application number was unintentionally delayed. A petition to accept an
unintentionally delayed claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(e) for the benefit of a
prior-filed provisional application must be accompanied by:
(i) The reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and paragraph (a)(5) of
this section to the prior-filed provisional application, unless previously
submitted;
(ii) The surcharge set forth in § 1.17(t); and
(iii) A statement that the entire delay between the date the claim was
due under paragraph (a)(5)(ii) of this section and the date the claim was
filed was unintentional. The Director may require additional information
where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.
(b) Where two or more applications filed by the same applicant contain
conflicting claims, elimination of such claims from all but one application
may be required in the absence of good and sufficient reason for their
retention during pendency in more than one application.
(c) If an application or a patent under reexamination and at least one
other application naming different inventors are owned by the same person
and contain conflicting claims, and there is no statement of record
indicating that the claimed inventions were commonly owned or subject to an
obligation of assignment to the same person at the time the later invention
was made, the Office may require the assignee to state whether the claimed
inventions were commonly owned or subject to an obligation of assignment to
the same person at the time the later invention was made, and if not,
indicate which named inventor is the prior inventor. Even if the claimed
inventions were commonly owned, or subject to an obligation of assignment
to the same person, at the time the later invention was made, the
conflicting claims may be rejected under the doctrine of double patenting
in view of such commonly owned or assigned applications or patents under
reexamination.
. 9. Section 1.104 is amended by revising paragraphs (a)(1) and (b) to read
as follows:
§ 1.104 Nature of examination.
(a) Examiner's action. (1) On taking up an application for examination
or a patent in a reexamination proceeding, the examiner shall make a
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1015 |
thorough study thereof and shall make a thorough investigation of the
available prior art relating to the subject matter of the claimed
invention. The examination shall be complete with respect both to
compliance of the application or patent under reexamination with the
applicable statutes and rules and to the patentability of the invention as
claimed, as well as with respect to matters of form, unless otherwise
indicated.
* * * * *
(b) Completeness of examiner's action. The examiner's action will be
complete as to all matters, except that in appropriate circumstances, such
as misjoinder of invention, fundamental defects in the application, and the
like, the action of the examiner may be limited to such matters before
further action is made. However, matters of form need not be raised by the
examiner until a claim is found allowable.
* * * * *
§ 1.105 [Amended]
. 10. Section 1.105 is amended by removing paragraph (a)(1)(ix).
. 11. Section 1.110 is revised to read as follows:
§ 1.110 Inventorship and date of invention of the subject matter of
individual claims.
When more than one inventor is named in an application or patent, the
Patent and Trademark Office, when necessary for purposes of an Office
proceeding, may require an applicant, patentee, or owner to identify the
inventive entity of the subject matter of each claim in the application or
patent. Where appropriate, the invention dates of the subject matter of
each claim and the ownership of the subject matter on the date of invention
may be required of the applicant, patentee or owner. See also §§ 1.78(c)
and 1.130.
. 12. Section 1.114 is amended by removing paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) and
by revising paragraphs (a) and (d) to read as follows:
§ 1.114 Request for continued examination.
(a) If prosecution in an application is closed, an applicant may request
continued examination of the application by filing a submission and the fee
set forth in § 1.17(e) prior to the earliest of:
(1) Payment of the issue fee, unless a petition under § 1.313 is
granted;
(2) Abandonment of the application; or
(3) The filing of a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit under 35 U.S.C. 141, or the commencement of a civil
action under 35 U.S.C. 145 or 146, unless the appeal or civil action is
terminated.
* * * * *
(d) If an applicant timely files a submission and fee set forth in
§ 1.17(e), the Office will withdraw the finality of any Office action and
the submission will be entered and considered. If an applicant files a
request for continued examination under this section after appeal, but
prior to a decision on the appeal, it will be treated as a request to
withdraw the appeal and to reopen prosecution of the application before the
examiner. An appeal brief (§ 41.37 of this title) or a reply brief (§ 41.41
of this title), or related papers, will not be considered a submission
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1016 |
under this section.
* * * * *
§ 1.117 [Removed and Reserved]
. 13. Section 1.117 is removed and reserved.
. 14. Section 1.136 is amended by revising paragraph (a)(1) to read as
follows:
§ 1.136 Extensions of time.
(a)(1) If an applicant is required to reply within a nonstatutory or
shortened statutory time period, applicant may extend the time period for
reply up to the earlier of the expiration of any maximum period set by
statute or five months after the time period set for reply, if a petition
for an extension of time and the fee set in § 1.17(a) are filed, unless:
(i) Applicant is notified otherwise in an Office action;
(ii) The reply is a reply brief submitted pursuant to § 41.41 of this
title;
(iii) The reply is a request for an oral hearing submitted pursuant to
§ 41.47(a) of this title;
(iv) The reply is to a decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences pursuant to § 1.304 or to § 41.50 or § 41.52 of this title;
or
(v) The application is involved in a contested case (§ 41.101(a) of this
title).
* * * * *
. 15. Section 1.142 is amended by removing paragraph (c) and by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 1.142 Requirement for restriction.
(a) If two or more independent and distinct inventions are claimed in a
single application, the examiner in an Office action will require the
applicant in the reply to that action to elect an invention to which the
claims will be restricted, this official action being called a requirement
for restriction (also known as a requirement for division). Such
requirement will normally be made before any action on the merits; however,
it may be made at any time before final action.
* * * * *
16. Section 1.145 is revised to read as follows:
§ 1.145 Subsequent presentation of claims for different invention.
If, after an Office action on an application, the applicant presents
claims directed to an invention distinct from and independent of the
invention previously claimed, the applicant will be required to restrict
the claims to the invention previously claimed if the amendment is entered,
subject to reconsideration and review as provided in §§ 1.143 and 1.144.
§ 1.265 [Removed]
. 17. Section 1.265 is removed.
. 18. Section 1.495 is amended by revising paragraph (g) to read as
| Top of Notices (190) December 29, 2009 |
US PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE |
1349 CNOG 1017 |
follows:
§ 1.495 Entering the national stage in the United States of America.
* * * * *
(g) The documents and fees submitted under paragraphs (b) and (c) of
this section must be clearly identified as a submission to enter the
national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371. Otherwise, the submission will be
considered as being made under 35 U.S.C. 111(a).
* * * * *
§ 1.704 [Amended]
. 19. Section 1.704 is amended by removing existing paragraph (c)(11) and
redesignating paragraph (c)(12) as paragraph (c)(11).
October 7, 2009 DAVID J. KAPPOS
Under Secretary of Commerce for
Intellectual Property and Director of the
United States Patent and Trademark Office
[1348 OG 254]