Case legislation is typically required in the course of the prosecution of a patent software in america Patent Workplace. Many patent examiners, nevertheless, don’t belief case legislation. Thus, utilizing america Patent Workplace’s personal Handbook of Patent Analyzing Process, which incorporates case legislation, is usually a greater authority that mere case citations.
However why is that this so? Legally, courtroom/board selections needs to be no less than as persuasive because the MPEP, particularly when comparable truth patterns are current. The explanations for the effectiveness of the MPEP, no less than anecdotally, vary from the suspicions that Examiners: dislike analyzing case legislation; consider that just about any choice might be distinguished on the information; and/or consider that for any choice there may be one other with a opposite holding.
With out opining on these suspicions, when one stands within the footwear of an Examiner, the explanations for the effectiveness of citing the MPEP grow to be clearer.
First, solely a fraction of the PTO’s inspecting corps are attorneys. Few Examiners have the authorized coaching to comfortably and confidently interpret case legislation; it’s in all probability a overseas course of to a lot of them. Consequently, many Examiners are likely to low cost courtroom/board selections and take the default place that if a call had advantage, the Workplace would have equipped steerage on its software within the MPEP (or one other official publication).
Second, and associated to the primary level, it may be troublesome and time consuming for Examiners to lookup and to research selections. With the PTO’s manufacturing quotas, this truth shouldn’t be ignored. Additionally, language problems with a number of the inspecting corps could amplify this problem HSSC Group D Question Paper.
Third, I think that reliance on case legislation generally is a dangerous proposition for an Examiner, particularly with second evaluations of allowances. Think about having to defend an allowance primarily based on an interpretation of case legislation, particularly with out corroboration within the MPEP. Reliance on the MPEP, in distinction, is the most secure wager for an Examiner trying towards this overview. In spite of everything, the MPEP describes itself as offering steerage and directions to Examiners concerning the prosecution of patent functions. What might be safer?