ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

35 U.S.C. § 121Divisional applications

submitted 74 years ago by ch. 950 to r/title-35-PATENTS · 169 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

If a patent application claims two separate inventions, the office can require a split. The second invention can become its own 'divisional' application, keeping the original filing date. One filed application can't later be used against the other in court.

If a patent application claims two or more inventions that are independent and distinct from each other, the Director of the Patent and Trademark Office may require the applicant to narrow ("restrict") the application to just one of those inventions. If the applicant then files the other invention as a separate "divisional application," and that application meets the requirements of section 120, it gets to keep the benefit of the original application's filing date. Once the Director has required this kind of restriction — or once an application has been filed as a result of that requirement — a patent that issues from one of these applications cannot later be used as a reference against the other one, either in the Patent and Trademark Office or in court. This protection applies to both the divisional application and the original application (and any patent issued on either), as long as the divisional application was filed before the other application's patent issued. Finally, a patent's validity can't be challenged just because the Director failed to require this kind of restriction.
the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

If two or more independent and distinct inventions are claimed in one application, the Director may require the application to be restricted to one of the inventions. If the other invention is made the subject of a divisional application which complies with the requirements of section 120 it shall be entitled to the benefit of the filing date of the original application. A patent issuing on an application with respect to which a requirement for restriction under this section has been made, or on an application filed as a result of such a requirement, shall not be used as a reference either in the Patent and Trademark Office or in the courts against a divisional application or against the original application or any patent issued on either of them, if the divisional application is filed before the issuance of the patent on the other application. The validity of a patent shall not be questioned for failure of the Director to require the application to be restricted to one invention.

Source credit: (July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 800; Pub. L. 93–596, § 1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, § 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906; Pub. L. 112–29, §§ 4(a)(2), 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 295, 335.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 1952Enacted · Act of July 19, 1952, ch. 950 · 66 Stat. 800
  • 1975Amended · Pub. L. 93-596 · 88 Stat. 1949
  • 1999Amended · Pub. L. 106-113 · 113 Stat. 1536, 1501
  • 2002Amended · Pub. L. 107-273 · 116 Stat. 1906
  • 2011Amended · Pub. L. 112-29 · 125 Stat. 295, 335

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by ch. 950 on 1952-07-19.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case