Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
They are responsible for an Art Unit of patent examiners, typically 8-15 examiners who examine cases in the same area of technology (e.g. GPS devices and aircraft are handled by different art units). Responsibilities include training new examiners, reviewing and signing office actions of junior examiners and acting as an advocate of the ...
The examination is intended to measure the applicant's familiarity with USPTO procedures, ethics rules, federal statutes, and regulations. The applicant is allowed to use an electronic copy of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) in the computer-based examination (and historically had access to a paper copy of the MPEP for the pencil-and-paper test), but is strictly prohibited from ...
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 ...
The delay was attributed by spokesmen for the Patent Office to a combination of a sudden increase in business method patent filings after the 1998 State Street Bank decision, the unfamiliarity of patent examiners with the business and financial arts (e.g., banking, insurance, stock trading etc.), and the issuance of a number of controversial ...
The United States Patent Classification is an official patent classification system in use and maintained by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). It was mostly replaced by the Cooperative Patent Classification (CPC) on January 1, 2013. [1] Plant and design patents are still classified solely within USPC at the USPTO.
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.
Get AOL Mail for FREE! Manage your email like never before with travel, photo & document views. Personalize your inbox with themes & tabs. You've Got Mail!
Many American patent practitioners believe, that the broad discretion given to the USPTO and the lack of judicial review on the issues of unity of invention, allow patent examiners to cynically "issue knee-jerk restriction requirements due to incentives at the USPTO to increase revenue or for examiners to perform less work for the same credit."