Office action

Last updated

In the United States, an Office action is a document written by an examiner in a patent or trademark examination procedure and mailed to an applicant [1] for a patent or trademark. The expression is used in many jurisdictions.

Contents

Formally, the "O" is supposed to be capitalized, since it refers to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. [2]

United States

Trademark law

In United States trademark law, an Office action is issued by an examiner for the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), [3] rejecting an application to register a trademark. An Office action typically includes one or both of two elements. The first possible element is the category of "informalities", matters such as an inadequate sample to show use of the mark, providing insufficient information with respect to the nature of the entity seeking the mark (for example, failing to name the partners in a partnership), or providing insufficient information for the examiner to determine what, exactly, the goods and services provided by the applicant are.

The second possible element of an Office action is an actual basis for rejection of the mark itself. The most frequent bases are likelihood of confusion with an existing registered mark and genericness or descriptiveness of the mark for which registration is sought. Rarely, a mark will be rejected as "immoral or scandalous", usually if it contains sexually suggestive terms, or vulgarities, for example the rejection of a logo with a defecating dog in Greyhound Corp. v. Both Worlds, Inc., 6 U.S.P.Q.2d 1635.

When an Office action is issued, the applicant has three months to respond to the Examiner with possibility of being extended for an equal period.[ citation needed ] If the Office action was issued with respect to "informalities", the response may simply be the correction of these matters by providing additional information. If the action is premised on a defect in the mark itself, such as likelihood of confusion, genericness, or descriptiveness, the applicant may need to present evidence and legal argument to overcome this rejection. If the Examiner is not convinced by the evidence submitted, a final Office action will issue. This may be appealed to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. A final Office action is also known as a filing refusal.

Patent law

In United States patent law, an Office action is a document written by a patent examiner in response to a patent application after the examiner has examined the application. [4] [5] The Office action cites prior art and gives reasons why the examiner has allowed, or approved, the applicant's claims, and/or rejected the claims.

An Office action may be "final" or "non-final". In a non-final Office action, the applicant is entitled to reply and request reconsideration or further examination, with or without making an amendment. In a final Office action, the applicant has two options for reply. In the first option, the applicant may appeal rejection of claims to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. Otherwise, the applicant may file an amendment which complies with the requirements set forth in the Office action. Reply to a final rejection must include cancellation of, or appeal from the rejection of, each rejected claim. If any claim stands allowed, the reply to a final rejection must comply with any requirements or objections as to form. Replies to final Office actions must be in accordance with 37 C.F.R. 1.113-1.114. [6] [7] [8]

When an Office action is issued, the applicant may take up to six months to respond to the Examiner. Note that a shortened statutory period of between one and three months usually applies (justified by the USPTO's desire for speedy prosecution of applications) and responses sent later than the shortened period require the filing of a petition and the payment of a petition fee that varies with the number of additional months requested. Each additional month requires an increasingly higher fee. For example, when an Examiner sends a restriction requirement, a one-month shortened statutory period applies, and if the applicant sends a response on the 31st or 32nd day (depending on the month, as well as on Saturday/Sunday/holiday practice; note that February is granted 30 days), a petition for a one-month extension, and the associated fee, must accompany the response. Most other Office actions have shortened statutory periods of either two or three months. Note however that an applicant cannot petition for an extension of time beyond the six-month limit.

FAOM is an acronym used by the USPTO for "first action on the merits".

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">United States Patent and Trademark Office</span> United States national patent bureau

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is an agency in the U.S. Department of Commerce that serves as the national patent office and trademark registration authority for the United States. The USPTO's headquarters are in Alexandria, Virginia, after a 2005 move from the Crystal City area of neighboring Arlington, Virginia.

A patent attorney is an attorney who has the specialized qualifications necessary for representing clients in obtaining patents and acting in all matters and procedures relating to patent law and practice, such as filing patent applications and oppositions to granted patents.

A patent examiner is an employee, usually a civil servant with a scientific or engineering background, working at a patent office. Major employers of patent examiners are the European Patent Office (EPO), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the Japan Patent Office (JPO), and other patent offices around the world.

In United States patent law, a petition to make special (PTMS) is a formal request submitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) asking that a patent application be examined ahead of the other pending applications in the same technological art.

Under United States patent law, a continuing patent application is a patent application that follows, and claims priority to, an earlier-filed patent application. A continuing patent application may be one of three types: a continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part. Although continuation and continuation-in-part applications are generally available in the U.S. only, divisional patent applications are also available in other countries, as such availability is required under Article 4G of the Paris Convention.

Business method patents are a class of patents which disclose and claim new methods of doing business. This includes new types of e-commerce, insurance, banking and tax compliance etc. Business method patents are a relatively new species of patent and there have been several reviews investigating the appropriateness of patenting business methods. Nonetheless, they have become important assets for both independent inventors and major corporations.

Patent prosecution describes the interaction between applicants and their representatives, and a patent office with regard to a patent, or an application for a patent. Broadly, patent prosecution can be split into pre-grant prosecution, which involves arguing before, and sometimes negotiation with, a patent office for the grant of a patent, and post-grant prosecution, which involves issues such as post-grant amendment and opposition.

In most patent laws, unity of invention is a formal administrative requirement that must be met for a patent application to proceed to grant. An issued patent can claim only one invention or a group of closely related inventions. The purpose of this requirement is administrative as well as financial. The requirement serves to preclude the possibility of filing one patent application for several inventions, while paying only one set of fees. Unity of invention also makes the classification of patent documents easier.

Under United States patent law, the term of patent, provided that maintenance fees are paid on time, is 20 years from the filing date of the earliest U.S. or international (PCT) application to which priority is claimed.

Under United States patent law, a provisional application is a legal document filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), that establishes an early filing date, but does not mature into an issued patent unless the applicant files a regular non-provisional patent application within one year. There is no such thing as a "provisional patent".

The United States is considered to have the most favorable legal regime for inventors and patent owners in the world. Under United States law, a patent is a right granted to the inventor of a (1) process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter, (2) that is new, useful, and non-obvious. A patent is the right to exclude others, for a limited time from profiting of a patented technology without the consent of the patent-holder. Specifically, it is the right to exclude others from: making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing, inducing others to infringe, applying for an FDA approval, and/or offering a product specially adapted for practice of the patent.

Maintenance fees or renewal fees are fees paid to maintain a granted patent in force. Some patent laws require the payment of maintenance fees for pending patent applications. Not all patent laws require the payment of maintenance fees and different laws provide different regulations concerning not only the amount payable but also the regularity of the payments. In countries where maintenance fees are to be paid annually, they are sometimes called patent annuities.

In United States patent law, a reexamination is a process whereby anyone—third party or inventor—can have a U.S. patent reexamined by a patent examiner to verify that the subject matter it claims is patentable. To have a patent reexamined, an interested party must submit prior art, in the form of patents or printed publications, that raises a "substantial new question of patentability". The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act makes substantial changes to the U.S. patent system, including new mechanisms for challenging patents at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. One of the new mechanisms is a post-grant review proceeding, which will provide patent challengers expanded bases on which to attack patents.

The Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) is published by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for use by patent attorneys and agents and patent examiners. It describes all of the laws and regulations that must be followed in the examination of U.S. patent applications, and articulates their application to an enormous variety of different situations. The MPEP is based on Title 37 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which derives its authority from Title 35 of the United States Code, as well as on case law arising under those titles. The first version of the MPEP was published in 1920 by the Patent and Trademark Office Society.

This is a list of legal terms relating to patents and patent law. A patent is not a right to practice or use the invention claimed therein, but a territorial right to exclude others from commercially exploiting the invention, granted to an inventor or his successor in rights in exchange to a public disclosure of the invention.

In order to be registered as a patent agent or patent attorney in the United States, one must pass the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) registration examination, officially called the Examination for Registration to Practice in Patent Cases Before the United States Patent and Trademark Office and known informally as the patent bar.

An information disclosure statement refers to a submission of relevant background art or information to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) by an applicant for a patent during the patent prosecution process. There is a duty on all patent applicants to disclose relevant art or background information that the applicant is aware of and that may be relevant to the patentability of the applicant's invention, as established by the United States Code title 35 and related sections of 37 CFR and the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). If a patent applicant, with deceptive intent for art known to the applicant, fails to submit material prior art to the USPTO, then any patent that later issues from the patent application may be declared unenforceable because of inequitable conduct. Furthermore, the duty to submit such relevant information to the USPTO lies not only on the applicant or inventor, but also on any patent attorney or other legal staff employed by the applicant.

The involvement of the public in patent examination is used in some forms to help identifying relevant prior art and, more generally, to help assessing whether patent applications and inventions meet the requirements of patent law, such as novelty, inventive step or non-obviousness, and sufficiency of disclosure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Backlog of unexamined patent applications</span>

Although not clearly defined, the backlog of unexamined patent applications consists, at one point in time, of all the patent applications that have been filed and still remain to be examined. The backlog was said to be 4.2 million worldwide in 2007, and in 2009 it reportedly continued to grow. Alone, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) was reported to have, in 2009, a backlog of more than 700,000 patent applications.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is an administrative law body of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) which decides issues of patentability. It was formed on September 16, 2012, as one part of the America Invents Act. Prior to its formation, the main judicial body in the USPTO was the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI).

References

  1. ↑ "Changes to Practice for Continued Examination Filings, Patent Applications Containing Patentably Indistinct Claims, and Examination of Claims in Patent Applications," 72 Federal Register 46716 (August 21, 2007)
  2. ↑ "Concise Technical Writing: The Office Action" (PDF). lauchmangroup.com/. Lauchman Group 2002. Retrieved 2 December 2016.
  3. ↑ Trademarks - how to respond.
  4. ↑ Patent Prosecution (BitLaw).
  5. ↑ Intellectual Property- INVENTORS Committee: Short Description of the Patent Process.
  6. ↑ MPEP, section 706.07.
  7. ↑ 37 C.F.R. 1.113.
  8. ↑ 37 C.F.R. 1.114.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.