35 U.S.C. § 303 — Determination of issue by Director

submitted 46 years ago by Pub. L. 96-517 to r/title-35-PATENTS · 216 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

Within three months of a reexamination request, the Patent Director must decide whether it raises a real new question about a patent's validity. The Director can also raise this question on their own at any time. If the answer is no, that decision is final and cannot be appealed.

(a) Within three months after someone files a request to reexamine a patent under section 302, the Director must decide whether that request raises a "substantial new question of patentability" for any claim in the patent — with or without looking at other patents or publications. The Director can also raise this question on their own initiative, at any time, based on patents or publications they find or that were cited under sections 301 or 302. The fact that a patent or publication was already looked at or cited before doesn't stop it from raising a substantial new question now. (b) The Director's determination under subsection (a) goes into the patent's official file. A copy is promptly given or mailed to the patent's owner and to whoever requested the reexamination, if anyone did. (c) If the Director decides under subsection (a) that no substantial new question of patentability exists, that decision is final and cannot be appealed. In that case, the Director may refund part of the reexamination fee required under section 302.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain

(a)

Within three months following the filing of a request for reexamination under the provisions of section 302, the Director will determine whether a substantial new question of patentability affecting any claim of the patent concerned is raised by the request, with or without consideration of other patents or printed publications. On his own initiative, and any time, the Director may determine whether a substantial new question of patentability is raised by patents and publications discovered by him or cited under the provisions of section 301 or 302. The existence of a substantial new question of patentability is not precluded by the fact that a patent or printed publication was previously cited by or to the Office or considered by the Office.

(b)

A record of the Director’s determination under subsection (a) of this section will be placed in the official file of the patent, and a copy promptly will be given or mailed to the owner of record of the patent and to the person requesting reexamination, if any.

(c)

A determination by the Director pursuant to subsection (a) of this section that no substantial new question of patentability has been raised will be final and nonappealable. Upon such a determination, the Director may refund a portion of the reexamination fee required under section 302.

Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 96–517, § 1, Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 3015; amended Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, § 1000(a)(9) [title IV, § 4732(a)(9)(A), (10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, §§ 13105(a), 13206(b)(1), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1900, 1905, 1906; Pub. L. 112–29, §§ 6(h)(1)(A), 20(j), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 312, 335.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit

1980Enacted · Pub. L. 96-517 · 94 Stat. 3015
1999Amended · Pub. L. 106-113 · 113 Stat. 1536, 1501
2002Amended · Pub. L. 107-273 · 116 Stat. 1900, 1905, 1906
2011Amended · Pub. L. 112-29 · 125 Stat. 312, 335

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 96-517 on 1980-12-12.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

no arguments yet — make the first case