Go to MPEP - Table of Contents
2271 Final Action [R-2] - 2200 Citation of Prior Art and Ex Parte Reexamination of Patents
2271 Final Action [R-2]
Before a final action is in order, a clear issue should be developed between the examiner and the patent owner. To bring the prosecution to a speedy conclusion and at the same time deal justly with the patent owner and the public, the examiner will twice provide the patent owner with such information and references as may be useful in defining the position of the Office as to unpatentability before the action is made final. Initially, the decision ordering reexamination of the patent will contain an identification of the new questions of patentability that the examiner considers to be raised by the prior art considered. In addition, the first Office action will reflect the consideration of any arguments and/or amendments contained in the request, the owner's statement filed pursuant to 37 CFR 1.530, and any reply thereto by the requester, and should fully apply all relevant grounds of rejection to the claims.
The statement which the patent owner may file under 37 CFR 1.530 and the response to the first Office action should completely respond to and/or amend with a view to avoiding all outstanding grounds of rejection.
It is intended that the second Office action in the reexamination proceeding following the decision ordering reexamination will be made final in accordance with the guidelines set forth in MPEP § 706.07(a). The examiner should not prematurely cut off the prosecution with a patent owner who is seeking to define the invention in claims that will offer the patent protection to which the patent owner is entitled. However, both the patent owner and the examiner should recognize that a reexamination proceeding may result in the final cancellation of claims from the patent and that the patent owner does not have the right to renew or continue the proceedings by refiling under 37 CFR 1.53(b) or 1.53(d) or former 37 CFR 1.60 or 1.62, nor by filing a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114. Complete and thorough actions by the examiner coupled with complete responses by the patent owner, including early presentation of evidence under 37 CFR 1.131 or 1.132, will go far in avoiding such problems and reaching a desirable early termination of the reexamination proceeding.
>In making the final rejection, all outstanding grounds of rejection of record should be carefully reviewed and any grounds or rejection relied on should be reiterated. The grounds of rejection must (in the final rejection) be clearly developed to such an extent that the patent owner may readily judge the advisability of an appeal. However, where a single previous Office action contains a complete statement of a ground of rejection, the final rejection may refer to such a statement and also should include a rebuttal of any arguments raised in the patent owner's response.
I. PATENTABILITY REVIEW CONFERENCE<
After an examiner has determined that the reexamination proceeding is ready for final rejection, the examiner will formulate a draft preliminary decision to issue a final rejection, the preliminary decision setting forth which claims to reject, the grounds of rejection, which claims to allow/confirm and reasons for allowance/confirmation. The examiner will then inform his/her Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) of his/her intent to issue the final rejection. The SPE will convene a patentability review conference, and the conference members will review the patentability of the claim(s) pursuant to MPEP § 2271.01. If the conference confirms the examiner's preliminary decision to reject and/or allow the claims, the Office action (Notice of Intent to Issue *>Ex Parte< Reexamination Certificate (NIRC) or final rejection) shall be issued and signed by the examiner, with the two other conferees initialing the action (as "conferee") to indicate their presence in the conference. If the conference does not confirm the examiner's preliminary decision, the proposed final rejection will not be issued by the examiner; but rather, the examiner will issue the appropriate Office action reflecting the decision of the conference.
**>II. FORM PARAGRAPHS<
The final rejection letter should conclude with one of form paragraphs 22.09 or 22.10.
**>¶ 22.09 Ex Parte Reexamination - Action Is Final
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL.
A shortened statutory period for response to this action is set to expire [1] from the mailing date of this action.
Extensions of time under 37 CFR 1.136(a) do not apply in reexamination proceedings. The provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 apply only to "an applicant" and not to parties in a reexamination proceeding. Further, in 35 U.S.C. 305 and in 37 CFR 1.550(a), it is required that reexamination proceedings "will be conducted with special dispatch within the Office."
Extensions of time in reexamination proceedings are provided for in 37 CFR 1.550(c). A request for extension of time must be filed on or before the day on which a response to this action is due. The mere filing of a request will not effect any extension of time. An extension of time will be granted only for sufficient cause, and for a reasonable time specified.
The filing of a timely first response to this final rejection will be construed as including a request to extend the shortened statutory period for an additional month, which will be granted even if previous extensions have been granted. In no event, however, will the statutory period for response expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final action. See MPEP § 2265.
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph may be used only in reexamination proceedings.
2. In bracket 1, insert the appropriate period for response, which is normally TWO (2) MONTHS. In court sanctioned or stayed litigation situations a ONE (1) MONTH period should be set.
¶ 22.10 Ex Parte Reexamination - Action Is Final, Necessitated by Amendment
Patent owner's amendment filed [1] necessitated the new grounds of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a).
A shortened statutory period for response to this action is set to expire [2] from the mailing date of this action.
Extensions of time under 37 CFR 1.136(a) do not apply in reexamination proceedings. The provisions of 37 CFR 1.136 apply only to "an applicant" and not to parties in a reexamination proceeding. Further, in 35 U.S.C. 305 and in 37 CFR 1.550(a), it is required that reexamination proceedings "will be conducted with special dispatch within the Office."
Extensions of time in reexamination proceedings are provided for in 37 CFR 1.550(c). A request for extension of time must be filed on or before the day on which a response to this action is due. The mere filing of a request will not effect any extension of time. An extension of time will be granted only for sufficient cause, and for a reasonable time specified.
The filing of a timely first response to this final rejection will be construed as including a request to extend the shortened statutory period for an additional month, which will be granted even if previous extensions have been granted. In no event, however, will the statutory period for response expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of the final action. See MPEP § 2265.
Examiner Note
1. This form paragraph may be used only in reexamination proceedings.
2. In bracket 1, insert filing date of amendment.
3. In bracket 2, insert the appropriate period for response, which is normally TWO (2) MONTHS. In court sanctioned or stayed litigation situations a ONE (1) MONTH period should be set.
4. As with all other Office correspondence on the merits in a reexamination proceeding, the final Office action must be signed by a primary examiner.
III. ART CITED BY PATENT OWNER DURING PROSECUTION
Where art is submitted in a prior art citation under 37 CFR 1.501 and/or 37 CFR 1.555 (an IDS filed in a reexamination is construed as a prior art citation) and the submission is not accompanied by a statement similar to that of 37 CFR 1.97(e), the examiner may use the art submitted and make the next Office action final whether or not the claims have been amended, provided that no other new ground of rejection is introduced by the examiner based on the new art not cited in the prior art citation. See MPEP § 706.07(a).
IV. SIGNATORY AUTHORITY<
As with all other Office correspondence on the merits in a reexamination proceeding, the final Office action must be signed by a primary examiner.
Go to MPEP - Table of Contents