Go to MPEP - Table of Contents
803 Restriction - When Proper - 800 Restriction in Applications Filed Under 35 U.S.C. 111; Double Patenting
803 Restriction - When Proper
Under the statute an application may properly be required to be restricted to one of two or more claimed inventions only if they are able to support separate patents and they are either independent ( MPEP § 806.04 - § 806.04(i)) or distinct ( MPEP § 806.05 - § 806.05(i)).
If the search and examination of an entire application can be made without serious burden, the examiner must examine it on the merits, even though it includes claims to independent or distinct inventions.
CRITERIA FOR RESTRICTION BETWEEN PATENTABLY DISTINCT INVENTIONS
There are two criteria for a proper requirement for restriction between patentably distinct inventions:
(A) The inventions must be independent (see MPEP § 802.01, § 806.04, § 808.01) or distinct as claimed (see MPEP § 806.05 - § 806.05(i)); and
(B) There must be a serious burden on the examiner if restriction is required (see MPEP § 803.02, § 806.04(a) - § 806.04(i), § 808.01(a), and § 808.02).
GUIDELINES
Examiners must provide reasons and/or examples to support conclusions, but need not cite documents to support the restriction requirement in most cases.
Where plural inventions are capable of being viewed as related in two ways, both applicable criteria for distinctness must be demonstrated to support a restriction requirement.
If there is an express admission that the claimed inventions are obvious over each other within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 103, restriction should not be required. In re Lee, 199 USPQ 108 (Comm'r Pat. 1978).
For purposes of the initial requirement, a serious burden on the examiner may be prima facie shown if the examiner shows by appropriate explanation of separate classification, or separate status in the art, or a different field of search as defined in MPEP § 808.02. That prima facie showing may be rebutted by appropriate showings or evidence by the applicant. Insofar as the criteria for restriction practice relating to Markush-type claims is concerned, the criteria is set forth in MPEP § 803.02. Insofar as the criteria for restriction or election practice relating to claims to genus-species, see MPEP § 806.04(a) - § 806.04(i) and § 808.01(a).
Go to MPEP - Table of Contents