Interim Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility for Process Claims in View of Bilski v. Kappos
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO or Office) has prepared Interim Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility for Process Claims in view of Bilski v. Kappos (Interim Bilski Guidance) for its personnel to use when determining subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101 in view of the recent decision by the United States Supreme Court (Supreme Court) in Bilski v. Kappos, No. 08-964 (June 28, 2010). It is intended to be used by Office personnel as a supplement to the previously issued Interim Examination Instructions for Evaluating Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. 101 dated August 24, 2009 (Interim Instructions) and the memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps on the Supreme Court Decision in Bilski v. Kappos dated June 28, 2010. This guidance supersedes previous guidance on subject matter eligibility that conflicts with the Interim Bilski Guidance. Any member of the public may submit written comments on the Interim Bilski Guidance. The Office is especially interested in receiving comments regarding the scope and extent of the holding in Bilski.
Treatment of Letters Stating That the USPTO's Patent Term Adjustment Determination Is Greater Than What the Applicant or Patentee Believes Is Appropriate
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is clarifying its treatment of letters submitted by applicants and patentees stating that the USPTO's patent term adjustment determination indicated on a notice of allowance, issue notification, or patent, is greater than what the applicant or patentee believes is appropriate. The USPTO will place these letters in the file of the application or patent without further review. The USPTO will no longer review these letters or issue certificates of correction on the basis of a review of these letters. If the applicant or patentee wants the USPTO to reconsider its patent term adjustment determination, the applicant or patentee must use the procedures set forth in 37 CFR 1.705 for requesting reconsideration of a patent term adjustment determination. A patentee may also file a terminal disclaimer disclaiming any period considered in excess of the appropriate patent term adjustment. However, the USPTO does not require an applicant or patentee to file either a request for reconsideration under 37 CFR 1.705 or a terminal disclaimer when the patent term adjustment indicated on a notice of allowance, issue notification, or patent is greater than what the applicant or patentee believes is appropriate.
United States Patent and Trademark Office Draft Strategic Plan for FY 2010-2015
This notice announces that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) draft strategic plan for fiscal years (FY) 2010-2015 is available for public review and comment. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) requires Federal agencies to establish a strategic plan covering not less than five years, and to solicit the views and suggestions of those entities potentially affected by or interested in the plan. This plan which identifies the strategic goals and priorities of the administration and leadership of the agency is a revision of the FY 2007-2012 strategic plan. The USPTO's current plan, the FY 2007-2012 strategic plan, may be viewed on the USPTO Web site at http://www.uspto.gov as can the agency's draft plan for FY 2010-2015.