直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

IP Update

USPTO Withdraws Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Relating to Terminal Disclaimers

December 3, 2024

By Mary C. Till; Jeffrey M. Jacobstein

Good news for patent applicants—at least for the moment—as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced on December 3 that it is withdrawing its proposal to expand the statements required when filing a terminal disclaimer to obviate a double patenting rejection. On May 10, the USPTO issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (89 Fed. Reg. 40439) that would have required patent applicants (or patentees in reexaminations or reissues) to include an additional statement agreeing that a subject patent would only be enforceable if the subject patent or application had never been tied directly or indirectly to another patent by one or more terminal disclaimers in which: (1) any claim had been finally held unpatentable or invalid as anticipated or obvious (under 35 U.S.C. § 102 or 103) by a Federal court in a civil action or by the USPTO, and all appeal rights have been exhausted; or (2) a statutory disclaimer of a claim was filed after any challenge based on anticipation or obviousness to that claim has been made. 

On December 4, 2024, the Federal Register will publish a notice from the USPTO indicating that the May 10, 2024, notice of proposed rulemaking is being withdrawn. The notice gives the following reasons for the withdrawal:

During the proposed rule’s 60-day comment period, the USPTO received more than 300 comments from a variety of stakeholders, including commenters both supporting and opposing the proposal. . . . 

In light of resource constraints, the USPTO has decided not to move forward with the proposed rule at this time and to withdraw the proposed rule. 

This means that, right now, patentees and applicants can continue to file terminal disclaimers without binding themselves to yet another limitation on enforceability of the subject patent.

Tags

patent application, rule change, federal register, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)

Related Practices

Prosecution and Portfolio Management

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Related Offices

Boston, MA

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Mary C. Till
Of Counsel
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4125
Email
Jeffrey M. Jacobstein
Partner
Boston, MA
+1 617 646 1664
Email

Copyright © Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. This article is for informational purposes, is not intended to constitute legal advice, and may be considered advertising under applicable state laws. This article is only the opinion of the authors and is not attributable to Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP, or the firm’s clients.

Related Insights

Webinar

Successful Strategies to Win Alice Motions and Fee Awards in Patent Cases Against Non-Practicing Entities

July 22, 2026

Webinar

Webinar

Early Motions in Trade Secret Litigation – Offensive and Defensive Insights

July 15, 2026

Webinar

Federal Circuit IP Blog

“2” Does Not Provide Written Description Support for “1”: Federal Circuit Affirms District Court’s Invalidation of Patent

July 8, 2026

Articles

EPR Academy, Part 4 of 6: Choosing Between EPR, IPR, PGR, and Reissue

July 1, 2026

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: May 2026

June 30, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Deadline Evolution: Director Extends Deadline for Requesting Director Review of Institution Grants to 30 Days

June 30, 2026

Articles

How Low Can You Go? Courts Lower Marking Defense Burden, Raising Patent Damages Risks

June 29, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Redesigns Done Right at the ITC: Federal Circuit Affirms ITC Determination of Noninfringement of Redesigned Products

June 26, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Mere Invalidity of Asserted Claims Does Not Render Patent Infringement Case Exceptional or Warrant Sanctions

June 26, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP