Knowledge (XXG)

Office action

Source 📝

462:
Each additional month requires an increasingly higher fee. For example, when an Examiner sends a restriction requirement, a one-month shortened statutory period applies, and if the applicant sends a response on the 31st or 32nd day (depending on the month, as well as on Saturday/Sunday/holiday practice; note that February is granted 30 days), a petition for a one-month extension, and the associated fee, must accompany the response. Most other Office actions have shortened statutory periods of either two or three months. Note however that an applicant cannot petition for an extension of time beyond the six-month limit.
394:(USPTO), rejecting an application to register a trademark. An Office action typically includes one or both of two elements. The first possible element is the category of "informalities", matters such as an inadequate sample to show use of the mark, providing insufficient information with respect to the nature of the entity seeking the mark (for example, failing to name the partners in a partnership), or providing insufficient information for the examiner to determine what, exactly, the goods and services provided by the applicant are. 454:. Otherwise, the applicant may file an amendment which complies with the requirements set forth in the Office action. Reply to a final rejection must include cancellation of, or appeal from the rejection of, each rejected claim. If any claim stands allowed, the reply to a final rejection must comply with any requirements or objections as to form. Replies to final Office actions must be in accordance with 37 C.F.R. 1.113-1.114. 410:
information. If the action is premised on a defect in the mark itself, such as likelihood of confusion, genericness, or descriptiveness, the applicant may need to present evidence and legal argument to overcome this rejection. If the Examiner is not convinced by the evidence submitted, a final Office action will issue. This may be appealed to the
401:
with an existing registered mark and genericness or descriptiveness of the mark for which registration is sought. Rarely, a mark will be rejected as "immoral or scandalous", usually if it contains sexually suggestive terms, or vulgarities, for example the rejection of a logo with a defecating dog in
461:
of between one and three months usually applies (justified by the USPTO's desire for speedy prosecution of applications) and responses sent later than the shortened period require the filing of a petition and the payment of a petition fee that varies with the number of additional months requested.
409:
When an Office action is issued, the applicant has three months to respond to the Examiner with possibility of being extended for an equal period. If the Office action was issued with respect to "informalities", the response may simply be the correction of these matters by providing additional
449:
An Office action may be "final" or "non-final". In a non-final Office action, the applicant is entitled to reply and request reconsideration or further examination, with or without making an amendment. In a final Office action, the applicant has two options for reply. In the first option, the
658: 516:"Changes to Practice for Continued Examination Filings, Patent Applications Containing Patentably Indistinct Claims, and Examination of Claims in Patent Applications," 72 451: 391: 148: 648: 498: 329: 143: 133: 653: 411: 397:
The second possible element of an Office action is an actual basis for rejection of the mark itself. The most frequent bases are
226: 303: 383: 20: 457:
When an Office action is issued, the applicant may take up to six months to respond to the Examiner. Note that a
594: 190: 169: 118: 427: 322: 231: 138: 398: 351: 252: 196: 87: 56: 51: 618: 606: 61: 315: 298: 221: 211: 206: 201: 102: 365:
Formally, the "O" is supposed to be capitalized, since it refers to the U.S. Patent and Trademark
435: 387: 347: 174: 82: 77: 247: 216: 123: 530: 262: 128: 92: 431: 288: 267: 257: 582: 443: 558: 642: 493: 583:
Intellectual Property- INVENTORS Committee: Short Description of the Patent Process
293: 46: 570: 272: 633: 442:
and gives reasons why the examiner has allowed, or approved, the applicant's
439: 359: 153: 438:
after the examiner has examined the application. The Office action cites
97: 355: 41: 634:
Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) on the USPTO web site
354:
examination procedure and mailed to an applicant for a
19:
For information on Knowledge (XXG) office actions, see
450:applicant may appeal rejection of claims to the 362:. The expression is used in many jurisdictions. 111:Patentability requirements and related concepts 531:"Concise Technical Writing: The Office Action" 430:, an Office action is a document written by a 323: 8: 414:. A final Office action is also known as a 346:is a document written by an examiner in a 330: 316: 25: 659:United States Patent and Trademark Office 452:Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences 392:United States Patent and Trademark Office 509: 280: 239: 182: 161: 110: 69: 33: 28: 468:is an acronym used by the USPTO for " 7: 499:Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 404:Greyhound Corp. v. Both Worlds, Inc. 16:Correspondence in patent proceedings 386:, an Office action is issued by an 134:Inventive step and non-obviousness 14: 412:Trademark Trial and Appeal Board 446:, and/or rejected the claims. 21:Knowledge (XXG):Office actions 1: 183:By region / country 649:United States trademark law 571:Patent Prosecution (BitLaw) 559:Trademarks - how to respond 384:United States trademark law 675: 459:shortened statutory period 240:By specific subject matter 18: 342:In the United States, an 191:Patent Cooperation Treaty 170:Sufficiency of disclosure 149:Person skilled in the art 119:Patentable subject matter 654:United States patent law 428:United States patent law 162:Other legal requirements 139:Industrial applicability 520:46716 (August 21, 2007) 399:likelihood of confusion 540:. Lauchman Group 2002 406:, 6 U.S.P.Q.2d 1635. 595:MPEP, section 706.07 70:Procedural concepts 538:lauchmangroup.com/ 436:patent application 175:Unity of invention 434:in response to a 340: 339: 666: 622: 616: 610: 604: 598: 592: 586: 580: 574: 568: 562: 556: 550: 549: 547: 545: 535: 527: 521: 518:Federal Register 514: 332: 325: 318: 26: 674: 673: 669: 668: 667: 665: 664: 663: 639: 638: 630: 625: 619:37 C.F.R. 1.114 617: 613: 607:37 C.F.R. 1.113 605: 601: 593: 589: 581: 577: 569: 565: 557: 553: 543: 541: 533: 529: 528: 524: 515: 511: 507: 490: 432:patent examiner 424: 380: 375: 336: 289:Patent analysis 253:Business method 24: 17: 12: 11: 5: 672: 670: 662: 661: 656: 651: 641: 640: 637: 636: 629: 628:External links 626: 624: 623: 611: 599: 587: 575: 563: 551: 522: 508: 506: 503: 502: 501: 496: 489: 486: 423: 420: 416:filing refusal 379: 376: 374: 371: 338: 337: 335: 334: 327: 320: 312: 309: 308: 307: 306: 301: 296: 291: 283: 282: 278: 277: 276: 275: 270: 265: 260: 255: 250: 242: 241: 237: 236: 235: 234: 229: 224: 219: 214: 209: 204: 199: 194: 185: 184: 180: 179: 178: 177: 172: 164: 163: 159: 158: 157: 156: 151: 146: 141: 136: 131: 126: 121: 113: 112: 108: 107: 106: 105: 100: 95: 90: 85: 80: 72: 71: 67: 66: 65: 64: 59: 54: 49: 44: 36: 35: 31: 30: 15: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 671: 660: 657: 655: 652: 650: 647: 646: 644: 635: 632: 631: 627: 620: 615: 612: 608: 603: 600: 596: 591: 588: 584: 579: 576: 572: 567: 564: 560: 555: 552: 539: 532: 526: 523: 519: 513: 510: 504: 500: 497: 495: 494:Search report 492: 491: 487: 485: 483: 479: 475: 471: 467: 463: 460: 455: 453: 447: 445: 441: 437: 433: 429: 421: 419: 417: 413: 407: 405: 400: 395: 393: 389: 385: 378:Trademark law 377: 373:United States 372: 370: 368: 363: 361: 357: 353: 349: 345: 344:Office action 333: 328: 326: 321: 319: 314: 313: 311: 310: 305: 302: 300: 297: 295: 292: 290: 287: 286: 285: 284: 279: 274: 271: 269: 266: 264: 261: 259: 256: 254: 251: 249: 246: 245: 244: 243: 238: 233: 232:United States 230: 228: 225: 223: 220: 218: 215: 213: 210: 208: 205: 203: 200: 198: 195: 192: 189: 188: 187: 186: 181: 176: 173: 171: 168: 167: 166: 165: 160: 155: 152: 150: 147: 145: 142: 140: 137: 135: 132: 130: 127: 125: 122: 120: 117: 116: 115: 114: 109: 104: 101: 99: 96: 94: 91: 89: 86: 84: 81: 79: 76: 75: 74: 73: 68: 63: 60: 58: 55: 53: 50: 48: 45: 43: 40: 39: 38: 37: 32: 27: 22: 614: 602: 590: 578: 566: 554: 542:. Retrieved 537: 525: 517: 512: 481: 477: 473: 469: 465: 464: 458: 456: 448: 425: 415: 408: 403: 396: 381: 366: 364: 343: 341: 294:Pirate Party 124:Inventorship 103:Infringement 47:Patent claim 227:Netherlands 83:Prosecution 78:Application 643:Categories 544:2 December 505:References 422:Patent law 248:Biological 88:Opposition 29:Patent law 440:prior art 360:trademark 352:trademark 263:Insurance 197:Australia 154:Prior art 98:Licensing 93:Valuation 62:Criticism 57:Economics 34:Overviews 488:See also 484:erits". 390:for the 388:examiner 304:Glossary 299:Category 281:See also 268:Software 258:Chemical 369:ffice. 217:Germany 144:Utility 129:Novelty 52:History 480:n the 476:ction 444:claims 356:patent 348:patent 212:Europe 202:Canada 42:Patent 534:(PDF) 472:irst 222:Japan 207:China 193:(PCT) 546:2016 466:FAOM 426:In 382:In 358:or 350:or 273:Tax 645:: 536:. 418:. 621:. 609:. 597:. 585:. 573:. 561:. 548:. 482:m 478:o 474:a 470:f 367:O 331:e 324:t 317:v 23:.

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Office actions
Patent
Patent claim
History
Economics
Criticism
Application
Prosecution
Opposition
Valuation
Licensing
Infringement
Patentable subject matter
Inventorship
Novelty
Inventive step and non-obviousness
Industrial applicability
Utility
Person skilled in the art
Prior art
Sufficiency of disclosure
Unity of invention
Patent Cooperation Treaty
Australia
Canada
China
Europe
Germany
Japan
Netherlands

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.