July, 2010

article thumbnail

The USPTO’s Interim Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility For Process Claims

Patentably Defined

The USPTO has published Interim Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility for Process Claims in View of Bilski v. Kappos. This Interim Guidance went into effect yesterday, July 27, 2010, supersedes previous guidance on subject matter eligibility, and is to be retroactively applied to all pending applications. The Interim Guidance is available here (in html) and here (in pdf).

article thumbnail

Extensions Of Time, How To Petition For An Extension, And Examples Of Petitions

Patentably Defined

When an Office action is issued by the USPTO, the time period for filing a reply begins. If a reply is not filed within the period specified in the Office action, the application is technically abandoned by operation of Rule. An applicant can usually buy an extension of up to five additional months, however, so long as the statutory limit of six months is not exceeded.

article thumbnail

Welcome To The New And Improved PatentablyDefined!

Patentably Defined

For those of you who have followed this blog over the years, welcome to version 3.0! This site has been quiet for the past several weeks while it underwent an overhaul, which included both a new, custom theme and a WordPress upgrade. I also used this time to take a break from posting and regain some focus. Sometimes, one just has to wait for inspiration to write about prosecuting patents.