Go to MPEP - Table of Contents
714.07 Amendments Not in Permanent Ink [R-3] - 700 Examination of Applications
714.07 Amendments Not in Permanent Ink [R-3]
37 CFR 1.52(a) requires "permanent dark ink or its equivalent" to be used on papers which will become part of the record and In re Benson, 122 USPQ 279, 1959 C.D. 5, 744 O.G. 353 (Comm'r Pat. 1959), holds that documents on so-called "easily erasable" paper violate the requirement. The fact that 37 CFR 1.52(a) has not been complied with may be discovered as soon as the amendment reaches the TC or later when the application is reached for action. In the first instance, applicant is promptly notified that the amendment is not entered and is required to file a permanent copy within 1 month or to order a copy to be made by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office at his or her expense. Physical entry of the amendment will be made from the permanent copy.
If there is no appropriate reply within the 1-month limit, a copy is made by the Patent and Trademark Office, applicant being notified and required to remit the charges or authorize charging them to his or her deposit account or credit card. See MPEP § 509.
In the second instance, when the nonpermanence of the amendment is discovered only when the application is reached for action, similar steps are taken, but action on the application is not held up, the requirement for a permanent copy of the amendment being included in the Office action.
A good direct or indirect copy, such as photocopy or facsimile transmission, on satisfactory paper is acceptable. But see In re Application Papers Filed Jan. 20, 1956, 706 O.G. 4 (Comm'r Pat. 1956). **
See MPEP § 608.01 for more discussion on acceptable copies.
**
Go to MPEP - Table of Contents