Patent Law

Nadir

By Gary Odom and Jordan Kuhn

The phrase "with all due respect" is common to arguments traversing claim rejection. But how much respect is due for utter breakdown of "examination on the merits"? This is not a rhetorical question.

Obviously, civility should not be transgressed. Incompetence is no excuse for incivility. That said, one afraid to state the obvious is merely afraid. Fear is not becoming. Even in an attorney. Especially in an attorney. Show some backbone.

In my most recent reply to non-final office action on one of my own patents, in preface to traversal under §103(a):

In the interest of compact prosecution, applicant replies to the most glaring oversights, preserving elaborated argumentation for the inevitable appeal.

The closing passage:

Examiner failed his basic examination obligations under 35 U.S.C. §131 and MPEP 706.02(j).

USPTO examination has become a bad joke, bringing disgrace to the examiner corps. In the past few years, applicant repeatedly receives careless rejections such as this. Still, thanks for not piling it on.

With rare exception, every application must now go to appeal. See you there next round.

Full post as published by The Patent Prospector on May 11, 2008 (boomark / email).