• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patents
      • Patent Consultation
      • Patent Search Service
      • Patent Application Service
      • Patent Prosecution
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademarks
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application Services
      • Trademark Prosecution
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
        • How to respond to an office action?
        • Request for non-publication of a patent application
        • Anatomy of a Patent Document
        • How to write a broad patent application?
        • Design patents: pros and cons
      • Patent costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • Worldwide patents
        • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
        • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
      • Responding to Office Actions
        • Overview of Office Actions
      • Trademarks
        • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
        • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
        • How to select a trademark?
          • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Lessons / FAQs #17-21: Responding to Office Action rejections

FAQs #17-21: Responding to Office Action rejections

April 11, 2018 by James Yang

Back to: Navigating the Patent System

FAQ #17:

Was there a mistake in the preparation or filing of my patent application if there is a rejection or notice to correct the formalities of the patent application?

No, it is likely just a normal part of the patent process.

A rejection or notice to correct informalities does not indicate that a mistake exists in the patent application. In fact, many patent applications are rejected for not meeting formal and/or informal requirements. Rejections can be rendered even after a formal patent search has been conducted and no prior art reference has been found that anticipates the invention. It could have been that the patent search failed to find the most relevant prior art reference, which was then found by the examiner. Even in this situation, there is not necessarily a mistake in the patent application. As explained in Chapter 3, a novelty search does not guarantee that a patent application will mature into an official patent but merely indicate the likelihood of a result.

FAQ #18:

What are the most common office action rejections?

Novelty and non-obviousness

The most common, substantive rejections in an office action are related to novelty and “non-obviousness.”64 Other substantive requirements include,  but are not limited to, written description and enablement, but those will not be discussed in great length here.65 Novelty requires that the invention be new and not already in existence. If the invention is not new, the United States government has no incentive to award a patent for it. The public already has access to the information held by the inventor. Non- obviousness requires that an invention be more than a mere, obvious variant of existing technology. An invention that is an obvious variant is, by definition, likely to be introduced by someone else to the public. The United States government has no incentive to award a patent for an obvious invention because it would otherwise, inevitably become known to the public. If your invention is non-obvious, the public benefits from it only by the inventor’s public disclosure of it. Granting patents is meant to motivate inventors to disclose novel and non-obvious inventions to the public.

FAQ #19:

Why is my invention being rejected, especially if it is more advanced than the cited prior art?

It is all about the claims!

The invention is being rejected because the claimed invention, not the disclosure (i.e., the entire specification, including both the text and drawings in the application), is not novel compared to the prior art. The claimed invention is defined only by that which is in the Claim Set. Only the claims are considered when rejecting an invention. The invention may be more advanced than the prior art, but the claims may be written so broadly as to encompass prior art references cited by the examiner and therefore not considered to be novel.

An examiner attempts to find a single document (i.e., primary art reference) that teaches all the elements or limitations recited in a claim. If one reference cannot be found that discloses all limitations of the claimed invention, the examiner may combine other documents (i.e., secondary references) and argue that the claimed invention is an obvious variant of the primary reference. That is, an examiner asserts that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to modify the primary reference in conjunction with the secondary reference(s) to come up with the claimed invention.

FAQ #20:

Why is the examiner rejecting the claims based on unrelated prior art?

The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) standard gives the examiner considerable leeway to determine analogous prior art.

It may appear that the examiner is rejecting the claimed invention based on prior art that seems irrelevant to the claimed invention. However, the examiner is most likely making a reasonable rejection. Under the BRI standard, the examiner can interpret every word written in a claim with the broadest reasonable interpretation. For example, a “foot support” for a human-powered vehicle could be a pedal or a skateboard deck. When an examiner searches through prior art, even if the invention is directed to a skateboard, the examiner may be searching prior art related to bicycles, tricycles, and other wheeled vehicles because they too include what could be considered a “foot support. The concept of the broadest reasonable interpretation gives the examiner great leeway in construing the claims. Unless an applicant appeals the examiner’s interpretation to the Patent, Trademark, and Appeal Board (PTAB), they should amend the language of the claims so that the language of the claims does not allow the examiner to interpret the claims so broadly.

In sum, the BRI standard significantly broadens the possible scope of the claimed invention during patent prosecution for examination purposes so that the examiner can consequently use what appears to be unrelated prior art to reject the claimed invention. An examiner could therefore reject the claim based on technology that is wholly unrelated to the invention. For example, an examiner may utilize prior art references related to fake concrete in rejecting an invention directed to technology for real concrete. The inventor may erroneously feel as if the examiner does not understand the invention or believe the patent application was written incorrectly because the legal definition of the prior art is much broader than what the inventor usually feels is analogous or related.

A reference can be used to reject an invention for obviousness if it is analogous art.66 A reference is an analogous art to the claimed invention if: (1) the references are from the same field of endeavor as the claimed invention (even if it addresses a different problem), or (2) the references are reasonably pertinent to the problem faced by the inventor (even if it is not in the same field of endeavor at the claimed invention). To have the reference withdrawn as prior art, the applicant could argue that the reference is non-analogous prior art based on the definition given above. However, in practice, even if the cited prior art is non-analogous, it is hard to convince the examiner to withdraw a reference for being non-analogous prior art.

It would be usually easier to argue that a non-analogous reference contains information that a person of ordinary skill in the art (e.g., real concrete) would be taught away from using or implementing the teachings in the art that are non-analogous (e.g., fake concrete reference), making the invention non-obvious. Non-obviousness arguments are easier to make and are stronger arguments for patentability than arguing that the reference is non-analogous art.

FAQ #21:

The patent application has been rejected on substantive grounds. Should I give up on the process?

It depends… how is the invention doing in the marketplace?

The decision to end the patent examination process is a hard one and is dictated by many different factors such as whether the invention is doing well in the marketplace and whether the arguments for patentability are strong.

If the invention is not doing well in the marketplace, the likelihood of the patent application maturing into a patent probably does not matter. In such cases, the costs and effort associated with the patent examination process should probably be abandoned to minimize legal costs. If the invention is doing very well in the marketplace, the likelihood that the patent application will mature into a patent is moot as well. The inventor must continue with the examination process because the patent application provides the only vehicle by which an inventor can block others, including large companies that are well-funded and have extensive marketing networks in the marketplace. The patent application equalizes such inequalities between startup businesses and large companies. Deciding to abandon the patent process is harder if the invention’s performance in the marketplace is mediocre because discontinuing the patent process may mean giving up on the business

If the arguments for patentability are weak based on the prior art references and the examiner’s rejection, it may be time to consider giving up on the examination process to mitigate the legal costs. However, all options should be analyzed before doing so because all patent rights could be irreversibly dedicated to the public upon abandonment and the inventor may lose the ability to secure a patent.

Footnotes:

64. See Chapter 10 for information on other substantive requirements such as the Written Description and Enablement requirements

65. 35 U.S.C. § 103 (See Appendix F)

66. Another way for protecting cornerstone technology is to approach the patent application process with a kitchen sink mentality. This means that the patent application will include everything about the cornerstone technology and all other bells and whistles and features peripheral to the cornerstone technology. The idea is that this omnibus patent application, over the course of many continuing applications, would have claims directed to different parts of the cornerstone technology, its peripheral features, and its benefits that would be submitted for examination in order to build a patent portfolio that protects both the cornerstone technology and its peripheral features

Previous Lesson
FAQs #10-16: Restriction Requirement
Next Lesson
FAQs #22-29: Broadening patent protection

Table of Contents

  • Introduction
    • Disclaimer
    • What you will find in this course
    • How to use this course
  • To Patent or Not To Patent (Section 1)
    • Purpose of the patent system
    • Benefits to the patent owner
    • Overview of the Seven Core Concepts
  • Getting Started: Seven Core Patent Concepts
    • Core Concept 1: Defining the Invention (Chapter 1)
    • Core Concept 2: Ownership–Resolving Ownership Issues (Chapter 2)
    • Core Concept 3: Conducting a Novelty Search (Chapter 3)
    • Core Concept 4: Different Ways to Protect an Idea (Chapter 4)
    • Core Concept 5: Three Bars to Patentability and the First-Inventor-to-File Regime (Chapter 5)
    • Core Concept 6: Preserving Foreign Patent Protection (Chapter 6)
    • Core Concept 7: The Overall Patent Process and Costs (Chapter 7)
  • Utility and Design Patent Applications (Section 2)
    • How to use this section on patent applications
    • Deciding what application to file: Design or utility?
    • Design Applications (Chapter 8)
    • Cost Considerations for Provisional and Nonprovisional Utility Patent Applications (Chapter 9)
    • Overarching Principles of a Utility Patent Application (Chapter 10)
    • Parts of a Utility Patent Application (Chapter 11)
    • Claims section
    • Writing Tip #1: How to write an application with the broadest possible protection (without breaking the bank) (Chapter 12)
    • Writing Tip #2: Be explicit. Don’t rely on inferences made in the patent application
    • Writing Tip #3: Using the word “may” versus “is”
    • Writing Tip #4: Preferred embodiments and using the word “substantial”
    • Writing Tip #5: Do not use the word, “invention” 
    • Writing Tip #6: Suboptimal embodiments
    • Writing Tip #7: Ranges
    • Writing Tip #8: Software Inventions
  • Patent Examination FAQs (Section 3)
    • FAQ #1: Patent Process Timing
    • FAQs #2-3: Patent Costs
    • FAQ #4: Duty to search v. Duty to disclose
    • FAQ #5: Review of Formalities
    • FAQs #6-7: Secrecy
    • FAQs #8-9: Nonpublication request and foreign patent protection
    • FAQs #10-16: Restriction Requirement
    • FAQs #17-21: Responding to Office Action rejections
    • FAQs #22-29: Broadening patent protection
  • Appendices
    • Appendix A: Trademark
    • Appendix B: Sample Utility Patent  
    • Appendix C: Sample Design Patent
    • Appendix D: Sample Trademark Registration
    • Appendix E: Entity Size 
    • Appendix F: Patent Laws

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Patent Consultations
Patent Searches
Patent Applications
Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Overview
Trademark Search Services
Trademark Application Services
Trademark Prosecution Services
Trademark Enforcement Services
Trademark Defense Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete Terms of Use
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney