uspto.gov
Skip over navigation

Comments on elimination of CPA's

From: jeff.draeger@intel.com
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 12:54 PM
To: jeff.draeger@intel.com; AB37 Comments
Subject: RE: Comments on elimination of CPA's

The ability to file a CPA provides the applicant with a convenient
mechanism to file a "new application" while continuing prosecution
basically uninterrupted. To my understanding, an RCE does not provide a
"new application" whereas a CPA is a new application. If that is
incorrect, and an RCE does qualify as a new application, my concern is
moot. If not, a solution would be to change the RCE rule so that the AIPA
amendment to 103 applies to an RCE.

The advantage of having a "new application" on file is that the applicant
may take advantage of the recent amendment to 35 USC Section 103, which
removes 102(e) art that is commonly assigned as a basis for a 103
rejection. Currently, filing a CPA after Nov. 29, 1999 on an application
filed before Nov. 29, 1999 allows the applicant to remove the 102(e) art
from any 103 rejection. This change would be disadvantageous to the
interests the amendment to Section 103 was intended to benefit. If an RCE
cannot be used for this purpose, prosecution in such cases would be
delayed because a continuation would need to be filed to take advantage of
the amendment to 103.

Jeff Draeger
Intel Corporation

Note that these views are my own and not necessarily those of Intel
Corporation as we have not discussed this issue and reached a consensus
opinion.
United States Patent and Trademark Office
This page is owned by Office of Patent Legal Administration.
Last Modified: 7/4/2009 5:51:22 PM