Go to MPEP - Table of Contents
Notice regarding Section 508 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998. Section 508 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 requires all United States Federal Agencies with websites to make them accessible to individuals with disabilities. At this time, the MPEP [HTML] files below do not meet all standards for web accessibility. Until changes can be made to make them fully accessible to individuals with disabilities, the USPTO is providing access assistance via telephone. MPEP Interim Accessibility Contact: 703-305-8813.
IV. INTERMEDIATE/FINAL PRODUCTS - ADMINISTRATIVE INSTRUCTIONS UNDER THE PCT
IV. INTERMEDIATE/FINAL PRODUCTS
Example 25
Claim 1: 
Claim 2: 
The chemical structures of the intermediate and final product are technically closely interrelated. The essential structural element incorporated into the final product is:
Therefore, unity exists between claims 1 and 2.
Example 26
Claim 1: 
Claim 2: 
(II) is described as an intermediate to make (I). The closure mechanism is one well known in the art. Though the basic structures of compound (I) (final product) and compound (II) (intermediate) differ considerably, compound (II) is an open ring precursor to compound (I). Both compounds share a common essential structural element which is the linkage comprising the two phenyl rings and the triazole ring. The chemical structures of the two compounds are therefore considered to be technically closely interrelated.
The example therefore satisfies the requirement for unity of invention.
Example 27
Claim 1: Amorphous polymer A (intermediate).
Claim 2: Crystalline polymer A (final product).
In this example a film of the amorphous polymer A is stretched to make it crystalline. Here unity exists because there is an intermediate final product relation in that amorphous polymer A is used as a starting product to prepare crystalline polymer A.
For purposes of further illustration, assume that the polymer A in this example is polyisoprene. Here the intermediate, amorphous polyisoprene, and the final product, crystalline polyisoprene, have the same chemical structure.
Example 28
Claim 1: Polymeric compound useful as fiber material identified by the following general formula:
Claim 2: Compound identified by the following general formula:
(useful as intermediate for polymeric compound I)
The two inventions are in an intermediate and final product relationship.
Substance (II) is a raw material for substance (I).
Meanwhile, both compounds share an essential structural element (repeating unit (X)) and are technically closely interrelated. The intermediate and final products therefore satisfy the requirements for unity.
Example 29
Claim 1: Novel compound having structure A (Intermediate).
Claim 2: Product prepared by reacting A with a substance X (Final Product).
Example 30
Claim 1: Reaction product of A and B (Intermediate).
Claim 2: Product prepared by reacting the reaction product of A and B with substances X and Y (Final Product).
In examples 29 and 30 the chemical structure(s) of the intermediate and/or the final product is not known. In (29) the structure of the product of claim 2 (the final product) is not known. In (30) the structures of the products of claim 1 (the intermediate) and claim 2 (the final product) are unknown. Unity exists if there is evidence which would lead one to conclude that the characteristic of the final product which is the inventive feature in the case is due to the intermediate. For example, the purpose for using the intermediates in (29) or (30) is to modify certain properties of the final product. The evidence may be in the form of test data in the specification showing the effect of the intermediate on the final product. If no such evidence exists then there is no unity on the basis of an intermediate-final product relationship.
[Annex C follows]