USPTO News Briefs – October 2015

0
209

USPTO Extends After Final Consideration Pilot 2. Program

A week ago, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office indicated on its website and thru a Patents Alert e-mail the After Final Consideration Pilot 2. (AFCP 2.) program continues to be extended through September 30, 2016. The AFCP, that was implemented in April 2012 (see “USPTO to evaluate After Final Consideration Pilot Program”), modified in May 2013 (see “USPTO News Briefs”), and extended this past year (see “USPTO News Briefs”) provides examiners having a limited quantity of non-production time — three hrs for utility and reissue applications — to think about responses filed carrying out a final rejection.

In applying the initial AFCP, work described six limited situations by which further amendments or arguments might be considered underneath the AFCP:

1. The amendment places the applying in condition for allowance by canceling claims or submission with formal requirement(s) as a result of objection(s) produced in the ultimate office action.

2. The amendment places the applying in condition for allowance by rewriting objected-to claims in independent form.

3. The amendment places the applying in condition for allowance by limitations from objected-to claims into independent claims, when the new claim can be established to become allowable with simply a restricted quantity of further consideration or search.

4. The amendment can be established to put the applying in condition for allowance with simply a restricted quantity of further search or consideration, even when new claims are added without cancelling a corresponding quantity of finally rejected claims.

5. The amendment can be established to put the applying in condition for allowance with the addition of new limitation(s) which require merely a limited quantity of further consideration or search.

6. The response comprises a perfected 37 CFR 1.131 or 37 CFR 1.132 affidavit or declaration (i.e. a brand new declaration which corrects formal defects noted inside a prior affidavit or declaration) which may be going to put the application in condition for allowance with simply a restricted quantity of further search or consideration[.]

Once the Office implemented the AFCP 2. program, it described three primary variations between your original AFCP and also the AFCP 2.: (1) a job candidate must file a request to have fun playing the AFCP 2. (2) an answer after final rejection underneath the AFCP 2. must have an amendment to a single independent claim and (3) whenever a response doesn’t create a determination that pending claims have been in condition for allowance, the examiner will request a job interview using the applicant to go over the response. The needs for taking part in the AFCP 2. are listed below:

(1) a transmittal form that demands consideration under AFCP 2. (work shows that applicants use form PTO/Senate bill/434)

(2) an answer under 37 CFR 1.116, including an amendment to a single independent claim that doesn’t broaden the scope from the independent claim in almost any aspect

(3) an announcement the applicant would like and open to take part in any interview initiated through the examiner in regards to the associated response (based on the notice, “willing and available” implies that you has the capacity to schedule the job interview within ten (10) calendar days in the date the examiner first contacts you)

(4) any necessary charges (e.g., a request filed greater than three several weeks following the mailing of the final rejection must range from the appropriate fee to have an extension of your time under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)) and

(5) the needed papers should be filed through the EFS-Web.

Work has noted that applicants submitting AFCP 2. demands will get a specialized form (PTO-2323) as a result of demands. The shape will communicate the status from the submission, and when relevant, also accompany a job interview summary. More information concerning the AFCP 2. program are available around the Office’s AFCP 2. website.

USPTO Extends Quick Path Information Statement Of Disclosure Pilot Program

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office also announced a week ago on its website and thru a Patents Alert e-mail the Quick Path Information Statement Of Disclosure (QPIDS) pilot program has additionally been extended to September 30, 2016. The QPIDS pilot program, that was implemented through the Office in May of 2012 (see “USPTO Announces Quick Path Information Statement Of Disclosure (QPIDS) Pilot Program”) and extended this past year (see “USPTO News Briefs”), enables applicants with an Information Statement Of Disclosure (IDS) considered following the issue fee continues to be compensated and without getting to file for a Request Ongoing Examination (RCE).

Underneath the QPIDS pilot program, an examiner will consider IDS submissions made following the issue fee continues to be compensated (and so long as the circumstances here are met) to find out whether prosecution ought to be reopened. In which the examiner determines that no item of knowledge within the IDS necessitates reopening prosecution, work will issue a remedied notice of allowability and also the application will pass to issue, therefore eliminating the delays and charges connected with RCE practice. To become qualified to have fun playing the pilot program, a credit card applicatoin should be an permitted utility or reissue application that the problem fee continues to be compensated and also the patent hasn’t yet issued, along with a QPIDS submission should be made digitally through the EFS-Web. The QPIDS submission must range from the following:

  1. A transmittal form that designates the submission like a QPIDS submission (e.g., form PTO/Senate bill/09)
  2. An IDS supported with a timeliness statement established in 37 CFR 1.97(e), using the IDS fee established in 37 CFR 1.17(p) — note: the QPIDS pilot program doesn’t get rid of the needs that the IDS be supported through the statement of 37 C.F.R. § 1.97(e)(1) or (2) and also the fee established in 37 C.F.R. § 1.17(p)).
  3. An Internet-based ePetition to withdraw from issue under 37 CFR 1.313(c)(2), using the petition fee established in 37 CFR 1.17(h) and
  4. An RCE, which is treated like a “conditional” RCE, using the RCE fee under 37 C.F.R. 1.17(e) — note: the IDS fee under 37 C.F.R. § 1.17(p) is going to be instantly came back when the examiner decides to reopen prosecution, necessitating the RCE be processed, and also the RCE fee is going to be instantly came back when the examiner determines that prosecution don’t have to be reopened.

More information concerning the QPIDS pilot program are available around the Office’s QPIDS website.

USPTO Implements Automated Interview Request System

Recently, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced using a Patents Alert e-mail it had become applying a brand new online interview scheduling tool, USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR). USPTO AIR enables Applicants to request an in-person, telephonic, or video conference interview by having an Examiner for his or her pending patent application by submitting a web-based form. More information regarding USPTO AIR are available here.

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here