Go to MPEP - Table of Contents
2304.02(d) Adequate Written Description [R-4] - 2300 Interference Proceedings
2304.02(d) Adequate Written Description [R-4]
37 CFR 41.202 Suggesting an interference.
(a) Applicant. An applicant, including a reissue applicant, may suggest an interference with another application or a patent. The suggestion must:
*****
(5) If a claim has been added or amended to provoke an interference, provide a claim chart showing the written description for each claim in the applicant's specification, and
*****
An applicant is not entitled to an interference simply because applicant wants one. The interfering claim must be allowable, particularly with respect to the written description supporting the interfering claim.
Historically, an applicant provoked an interference by copying a claim from its opponent. The problem this practice created was that differences in the underlying disclosures might leave the claim allowable to one party, but not to the other; or despite identical claim language differences in the disclosures might require that the claims be construed differently.
Rather than copy a claim literally, the better practice is to add (or amend to create) a fully supported claim and then explain why, despite any apparent differences, the claims define the same invention. 37 CFR 41.203(a). The problem of inadequate written description in claims added or amended to provoke an interference is so great that the issue has been singled out for heightened scrutiny early in the course of an interference. 37 CFR 41.201, under "Threshold issue."<
>
Go to MPEP - Table of Contents