|
SHORT TRIP TO THE PATENT
OFFICE
The Bottom Line. Being in proximity to the
United States Patent and Trademark Office gives my law office the added
advantages of an easy and low cost examiner interview in response to an
office action. This can often make the difference in explaining the
invention, clarifying what details require addressing in a written
response and better chance of avoiding mistaken issues that can directly
affect the scope of patent protection. A telephone interview is usually preferred by examiners, but for a complicated invention, it is sometimes valuable to have the potential to schedule an in-person visit with the examiner.
Patent Prosecution. The period after
a patent application is filed and until a patent is issued or the
application is rejected, is often called the period of patent prosecution.
Patent prosecution is simply implementing the appropriate responses to
actions by the patent office on a patent application.
Office Action. It is very common for a patent
examiner to issue an objection or rejection of a patent application. This
is usually done in writing and is called an "office action." An
objection or rejection is probably most often sent because of other
patents the examiner has found (called prior
art). The examiner believes the prior art he has found either covers
the same invention or makes it an obvious improvement over the prior art.
These are reasons for rejection of a patent. Numerous other reasons for
objecting to an application are possible and are based on the patent
statutes and associated regulations. Some rejections or objections may
even arise as a result of the examiner's misunderstanding of the claimed
invention. However, each such office action by an examiner requires a
positive response from the applicant to address it; otherwise the
application becomes abandoned. Some typical responses include filing
affidavits or declarations traversing rejections or objections, amendments
may be requested, or an explanation may be made with a request to
reconsider. No matter what the response, each such response becomes part
of the prosecution history of the patent, which is documented in the
official "file wrapper" for the application.
So What? The scope of a patent can be
significantly curtailed by its prosecution history. See a discussion of
this on this Law Firm's infringement
page. It is called "prosecution history estopple," or "file
wrapper estopple." A patent's scope is defined not only by its
literal claims, but also by the equivalents to what is claimed.
Essentially, whatever in the file wrapper indicates a change in the
application to further define or narrow the scope of the invention in
order to obtain a patent, will probably cause the applicant to surrender
scope. In other words, someone you consider to be infringing on your
invention with what you think are only minor changes, may be able to do so
without liability.
What Does Proximity to the United States Patent and
Trademark Office Have to Do with It? The goal is to minimize
changes to your application. Many such changes are unavoidable. However,
some are avoidable and these avoidable ones can affect your patent scope.
After an office action is received, the applicant's representative may
request an interview with the examiner pursuant to Patent Office
regulations (10 CFR 1.133). Such an interview is not always necessary, but it is usually a good idea to get the examiner's reaction to any proposed amendment to the claims.
Whether to hold the interview in-person with the examiner or simply by telephone is a matter of judgment, often determined by the convenience for the examiner. Many examiners are "hoteling," which means that they are usually not physically present on the USPTO campus in Alexandria, Virginia, but rather work out of their homes. So, scheduling an in-person visit can require the examiner to make a trip to the office. When a personal visit with the examiner is necessary is a matter of judgment. Having the option can be a good prosecution step for the benefit of the applicant. Being able to meet at the patent office with minimal travel expenses and minimal time consumption directly translates to lower cost for the applicant when an in-person visit is needed. Interviews, whether by telephone or in-person serve to
clarify the details of what the examiner sees as the problems. If errors
were made, it is a way to bring them up and correct them with the least
amount of written material added to the record. If amendments are needed,
it is the best way to focus in on exactly what needs to change to satisfy
the objection or rejection.
Conclusion. Thus, an examiner interview often
gives the applicant's representative a chance to steer the prosecution
history towards a path best serving the applicant. Being your
representative and being near the patent office makes having an in-person interview an option and a relatively less costly task for your benefit.
Home | How
to Communicate | Email to: lventre@lventre.com | Useful
Links
Client
Inventions | Bio | FAQs | Disclaimers
Search
© 2004 Louis Ventre, Jr.
This file last modified 05/19/20.
This page is https://www.lventre.com/close.html. |