Our previous post on the improper USPTO practice of presenting new restrictions for the first time in a final rejection has received an unprecedented response. Thank you to everyone who has reached out and offered support, resources, anecdotes, etc. As a follow-on, our friends at bigpatentdata.com have provided even further insight into the statistics of…

More on examiner interviews.

Take advantage of the USPTO’s free video conferencing system for examiner interviews.

The USPTO is Breaking the Law – Read how and lend your support to the cause.

Rejections approved by the supervisors in art unit 3747 called out by the PTAB as “particularly troubling.”

New Informative Decisions from the PTAB just released.

Some tips if you are prosecuting treatment methods and encounter restriction roadblocks.

This case illustrates not only how methods with mental steps can survive an Alice rejection at the PTAB, but also an overall strategy for handling cases landing on the desk of an examiner determined to make life difficult for the applicant.

The PTAB confirms that it is improper to reject distinct claim limitations of a claimed method with the same single element in the cited reference.

It is easy to contravene the prohibition against individually attacking references used in an obviousness combination. This post dissects the issues and proposes a few ways to reduce the ability of the USPTO to simply dismiss your arguments.