Understanding Restriction Practice and Double Patenting in the United States
May 10, 2011
Webinar
One patent per invention. This is a U. S. Patent and Trademark Office mantra and Examiners go to great lengths to enforce it. The U.S. Patent Statute contains a provision, 35 U.S.C. Section 101, that expressly precludes same-invention double patenting. The courts have also judicially created another kind of double patenting—obviousness-type double patenting—in which the claims are not identical, but are considered obvious variants of one another. Understanding these two types of double patenting is critical to ensure that a patent practitioner does not inadvertently and unnecessarily give up any patent rights.
USPTO Examiners also attempt to control the number of inventions claimed in an application through the use of restriction requirements. These restriction requirements, which force the applicant to select a group of claims for examination, initially limit the scope of the subject matter searched by the Examiners. But these restriction requirements are by no means the final arbiter of the claims that will ultimately issue as a patent. Understanding the Examiner’s burden when making a restriction requirement, as well as the requirements of rejoinder and the prohibition against subsequently making a double patenting rejection, are also critical in avoiding a loss of patent rights and increasing prosecution efficiency.
During this webinar, our speakers will address:
- Requirements for both double patenting rejections and restriction requirements
- Practice tips that will enable participants to recognize when Examiners are overreaching with their positions
- How to question the Examiner's reliance on double patenting rejections and restriction requirements
Moderator:
Speakers:
Time:
16:00 CEST
10:00 EDT
Registration for all webinars is free of charge, simply click here. Webinar access information will be sent upon registration.
