609.02 Information Disclosure Statements in Continued Examinations or Continuing Applications
|
I. CONSIDERATION OF PRIOR ART CITED IN A PARENT INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION
When filing a continuing application that claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 to a parent application (other than an international application that designated the U.S.), it will not be necessary for the applicant to submit an information disclosure statement in the continuing application that lists the prior art cited by the examiner in the parent application unless the applicant desires the information to be printed on the patent issuing from the continuing application.
- The examiner of the continuing application will consider information which has been considered by the Office in the parent application.
When filing a continuing application that claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120 to an international application that designated the U.S., it will be necessary for the applicant to submit an information disclosure statement in the continuing application listing the documents cited in the international search report and/or the international preliminary examination report of the international application if applicant wishes to ensure that the information is considered by the examiner in the continuing application.
II. IDS IN CONTINUED EXAMINATIONS OR CONTINUING APPLICATIONS
A. IDS That Has Been Considered (1) in the Parent Application, or (2) Prior to the Filing of a Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
1. Continued Prosecution Applications (CPAs) Filed Under 37 CFR 1.53(d)
Information which has been considered by the Office in the parent application of a continued prosecution application (CPA) filed under 37 CFR 1.53(d) will be part of the file before the examiner and need not be resubmitted in the continuing application to have the information considered and listed on the patent.
2. Continuation Applications, Divisional Applications, or Continuation-in-Part Applications Filed Under 37 CFR 1.53(b)
The examiner will consider information which has been considered by the Office in a parent application when examining:
- A continuation application,
- A divisional application, or
- A continuation-in-part application. A listing of the information need not be resubmitted in the continuing application unless the applicant desires the information to be printed on the patent.
3. Requests for Continued Examination (RCE) Under 37 CFR 1.114
Information which has been considered by the Office in the application before the filing of a RCE will be part of the file before the examiner and need not be resubmitted to have the information considered by the examiner and listed on the patent.
B. IDS That Has Not Been Considered (1) in the Parent Application, or (2) Prior to the Filing of a Request for Continued Examination
1. Continued Prosecution Applications Filed Under 37 CFR 1.53(d)
Information filed in the parent application that complies with the content requirements will be considered by the examiner in the CPA.
- No specific request from the applicant that the previously submitted information be considered by the examiner is required.
2. Continuation Applications, Divisional Applications, or Continuation-In-Part Applications Filed Under 37 CFR 1.53(b)
For these types of applications, in order to ensure consideration of information previously submitted, but not considered, in a parent application, applicant must resubmit the information in the continuing application.
If the IDS submitted in the parent application complies with 37 CFR 1.98(a) to (c), copies of the patents, publications, pending U.S. applications, or other information submitted in the parent application need not be resubmitted in the continuing application.
When resubmitting a listing of the information, applicant should submit a new listing that complies with the format requirements in 37 CFR 1.98(a)(1).
3. Requests for Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
Information filed in the application in compliance with the content requirements before the filing of a RCE will be considered by the examiner after the filing of the RCE.
- For example, an applicant filed an IDS after the mailing of a final Office action, but the IDS did not comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.97(d)(1) and (d)(2) and therefore, the IDS was not considered by the examiner.
- After applicant files a RCE, the examiner will consider the IDS filed prior to the filing of the RCE.
» 609.04(a) Content Requirements for an Information Disclosure Statement
