*****
· (e) Delayed priority claim. Unless such claim is accepted in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph, any claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) not presented in the manner required by paragraph (d) or (m) of this section during pendency and within the time period provided by paragraph (d) of this section (if applicable) is considered to have been waived. If a claim for priority is considered to have been waived under this section, the claim may be accepted if the priority claim was unintentionally delayed. A petition to accept a delayed claim for priority under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) must be accompanied by:
· (1) The priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) through (d) or (f), 365(a) or (b), or 386(a) or 386(b) in an application data sheet (§ 1.76(b)(6) ), identifying the foreign application to which priority is claimed, by specifying the application number, country (or intellectual property authority), day, month, and year of its filing, unless previously submitted;
· (2) A certified copy of the foreign application, unless previously submitted or an exception in paragraph (h), (i), or (j) of this section applies;
· (3) The petition fee as set forth in § 1.17(m); and
· (4) A statement that the entire delay between the date the priority claim was due under this section and the date the priority claim was filed was unintentional. The Director may require additional information where there is a question whether the delay was unintentional.
· (f) Time for filing certified copy of foreign application—
· (1) Application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a). A certified copy of the foreign application must be filed within the later of four months from the actual filing date of the application, or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior foreign application, in an original application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) filed on or after March 16, 2013, except as provided in paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this section. The time period in this paragraph does not apply in a design application.
· (2) Application under 35 U.S.C. 371. A certified copy of the foreign application must be filed within the time limit set forth in the PCT and the Regulations under the PCT in an international application entering the national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371. If a certified copy of the foreign application is not filed during the international stage in an international application in which the national stage commenced on or after December 18, 2013, a certified copy of the foreign application must be filed within the later of four months from the date on which the national stage commenced under 35 U.S.C. 371(b) or (f) (§ 1.491(a) ), four months from the date of the initial submission under 35 U.S.C. 371 to enter the national stage, or sixteen months from the filing date of the prior foreign application, except as provided in paragraphs (h), (i), and (j) of this section.
· (3) If a certified copy of the foreign application is not filed within the time period specified [in] paragraph (f)(1) of this section in an application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) or within the period specified in paragraph (f)(2) of this section in an international application entering the national stage under 35 U.S.C. 371, and an exception in paragraph (h), (i), or (j) of this section is not applicable, the certified copy of the foreign application must be accompanied by a petition including a showing of good and sufficient cause for the delay and the petition fee set forth in § 1.17(g).
· (g) Requirement for filing priority claim, certified copy of foreign application, and translation in any application.
· (1) The claim for priority and the certified copy of the foreign application specified in 35 U.S.C. 119(b) or PCT Rule 17 must, in any event, be filed within the pendency of the application, unless filed with a petition under paragraph (e) or (f) of this section, or with a petition accompanied by the fee set forth in § 1.17(g) which includes a showing of good and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the certified copy of the foreign application in a design application. If the claim for priority or the certified copy of the foreign application is filed after the date the issue fee is paid, the patent will not include the priority claim unless corrected by a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and § 1.323.
*****
The failure to perfect a claim to foreign priority prior to issuance of the patent may be cured via a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and 37 CFR 1.323, provided the requirements of 37 CFR 1.55 are met, or by filing a reissue application.
Except in certain situations, a certificate of correction can generally be used to perfect a claim to foreign priority where a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(e) to accept an unintentionally delayed priority claim is filed with a request for a certificate of correction in an issued patent. See MPEP § 214.02 for a discussion of the requirements for the petition. In situations where further examination would be required, the petition should not be granted. For example, further examination would be required where grant of the petition would cause the patent to be subject to a different statutory framework, e.g., where the foreign application has a pre-March 16, 2013 filing date in a patent that was examined under the first inventor to file (FITF) provisions of the AIA. In such situations, the filing of a reissue application with a petition for an unintentionally delayed priority claim would be required.
Effective May 13, 2015, 37 CFR 1.55(g) provides that the claim for priority and the certified copy of the foreign application must be filed within the pendency of the application, unless filed with a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(e), (f), or (g) as appropriate. 37 CFR 1.55(g) eliminates the need in many instances to file a reissue application in order to perfect a claim for foreign priority. Specifically,
· (A) Where the priority claim required under 37 CFR 1.55 was timely filed in the application but was not included on the patent because the requirement under 37 CFR 1.55 for a certified copy was not satisfied, the patent may be corrected to include the priority claim via a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and 37 CFR 1.323, accompanied by a grantable petition under 37 CFR 1.55(f) or, in the case of a design application, a grantable petition under 37 CFR 1.55(g). In this situation, a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(e) to accept an unintentionally delayed priority claim is not needed. A grantable petition under 37 CFR 1.55(f) or (g) must include the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(g) and a showing of good and sufficient cause for the delay in filing the certified copy of the foreign application; and
· (B) Where a priority claim under 37 CFR 1.55 was not timely made, 37 CFR 1.55(g) allows the priority claim and the certified copy required under 37 CFR 1.55 to be filed pursuant to a petition under 37 CFR 1.55(e) even if the application is not pending (e.g., a patented application) in situations where the correction sought would not require further examination.
37 CFR 1.55(h) provides that the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application will be considered satisfied in an application if a prior-filed nonprovisional application for which a benefit is claimed under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) contains a certified copy of the foreign application and the prior-filed nonprovisional application is identified as containing a certified copy of the foreign application. Thus, applicant may request a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and 37 CFR 1.323 where the prior-filed nonprovisional application is identified as containing a certified copy of the foreign application and where the priority claim was timely made in the application claiming benefit under 35 U.S.C. 120, 121, 365(c), or 386(c) and the certified copy of the foreign application was timely filed in the parent application.
As an example of when a request to issue a certificate of correction may be used in order to perfect a claim to foreign priority benefits, see In re Van Esdonk, 187 USPQ 671 (Comm’r Pat. 1975). In In re Van Esdonk, a claim to foreign priority benefits had not been filed in the application prior to issuance of the patent. However, the application was a continuation of an earlier application in which the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 119(a) -(d) or (f) had been satisfied. Accordingly, the Commissioner held that the "applicants’ perfection of a priority claim under 35 U.S.C. 119 in the parent application will satisfy the statute with respect to their continuation application."
Although In re Van Esdonk involved the patent of a continuation application filed under former 37 CFR 1.60, it is proper to apply the holding of that case in similar factual circumstances to any patented application having benefits under 35 U.S.C. 120. This is primarily because a claim to foreign priority benefits in a continuing application, where the claim has been perfected in the parent application, constitutes in essence a mere affirmation of the applicant’s previously expressed desire to receive benefits under 35 U.S.C. 119(a) -(d) or (f) for subject matter common to the foreign, parent, and continuing applications.
In summary, a certificate of correction under 35 U.S.C. 255 and 37 CFR 1.323 may be requested and issued in order to perfect a claim for foreign priority benefit in a patent if (1) the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 119(a) -(d) or (f) had been satisfied in the patented application or in a parent application prior to issuance of the patent, (2) the requirements of 37 CFR 1.55 are met, and (3) the correction sought would not require further examination.
As an alternative to requesting a certificate of correction, a claim to foreign priority benefits can be perfected by way of a reissue application in accordance with the rationale set forth in Brenner v. State of Israel, 400 F.2d 789, 158 USPQ 584 (D.C. Cir. 1968). In circumstances where a claim to foreign priority benefits cannot be perfected via a certificate of correction because the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 119(a) -(d) or (f) had not been satisfied in the patented application, or its parent, prior to issuance, and the requirements of 37 CFR 1.55 are not met, or where the correction sought would require further examination (e.g., where the foreign application has a pre-March 16, 2013 filing date in a patent that was examined under the first inventor to file (FITF) provisions of the AIA) the claim to foreign priority benefits can be perfected only by way of a reissue application. Note that 37 CFR 1.55(h) provides that the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application will be considered satisfied in a reissue application if the patent for which reissue is sought satisfies the requirement for a certified copy of the foreign application and such patent is identified as containing a certified copy of the foreign application.
*****
· (b) Subject to the conditions and requirements of this paragraph, if all or a portion of the specification or drawing(s) is inadvertently omitted from an application, but the application contains a claim under § 1.55 for priority of a prior-filed foreign application, or a claim under § 1.78 for the benefit of a prior-filed provisional, nonprovisional, or international application, that was present on the filing date of the application, and the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) is completely contained in the prior-filed application, the claim under § 1.55 or § 1.78 shall also be considered an incorporation by reference of the prior-filed application as to the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s).
· (1) The application must be amended to include the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) within any time period set by the Office, but in no case later than the close of prosecution as defined by § 1.114(b), or abandonment of the application, whichever occurs earlier. The applicant is also required to:
· (i) Supply a copy of the prior-filed application, except where the prior-filed application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111;
· (ii) Supply an English language translation of any prior-filed application that is in a language other than English; and
· (iii) Identify where the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings can be found in the prior-filed application.
· (2) Any amendment to an international application pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section shall be effective only as to the United States, and shall have no effect on the international filing date of the application. In addition, no request under this section to add the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings in an international application designating the United States will be acted upon by the Office prior to the entry and commencement of the national stage (§ 1.491 ) or the filing of an application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) which claims benefit of the international application. Any omitted portion of the international application which applicant desires to be effective as to all designated States, subject to PCT Rule 20.8(b), must be submitted in accordance with PCT Rule 20.
· (3) If an application is not otherwise entitled to a filing date under § 1.53(b), the amendment must be by way of a petition pursuant to § 1.53(e) accompanied by the fee set forth in § 1.17(f).
· (4) Any amendment to an international design application pursuant to paragraph (b)(1) of this section shall be effective only as to the United States and shall have no effect on the filing date of the application. In addition, no request under this section to add the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings in an international design application will be acted upon by the Office prior to the international design application becoming a nonprovisional application.
*****
37 CFR 1.57(b) (formerly 37 CFR 1.57(a) ) provides that if all or a portion of the specification or drawing(s) is inadvertently omitted from an application, but the application contains a claim under 37 CFR 1.55 for priority of a prior-filed foreign application, or a claim under 37 CFR 1.78 for the benefit of a prior-filed provisional, nonprovisional, international, or international design application that was present on the filing date of the application, and the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) is completely contained in the prior-filed application, the claim for priority or benefit shall be considered an incorporation by reference of the prior-filed application as to the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings.
The purpose of 37 CFR 1.57(b) is to provide a safeguard for applicants when a page(s) of the specification, or a portion thereof, or a sheet(s) of the drawing(s), or a portion thereof, is (are) inadvertently omitted from an application, such as through a clerical error. It allows inadvertently omitted material to be added to the application by way of a later-filed amendment if the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) is completely contained in the prior-filed application even though there is no explicit incorporation by reference of the prior-filed application. For a discussion of explicit incorporation by reference statements, see MPEP § 608.01(p).
The following conditions and requirements need to be met for an applicant to add omitted material to an application pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b):
· (A) the application must have been filed on or after September 21, 2004;
· (B) all or a portion of the specification or drawing(s) must have been inadvertently omitted from the application;
· (C) a claim under 37 CFR 1.55 for priority of a prior-filed foreign application, or a claim under 37 CFR 1.78 for the benefit of a prior-filed provisional, nonprovisional, international, or international design application, must have been present on the filing date of the application;
· (D) the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) must be completely contained in the prior-filed application;
· (E) applicant must file an amendment to include the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) within any time period set by the Office, but in no case later than the close of prosecution as defined by 37 CFR 1.114(b), or abandonment of the application, whichever occurs earlier;
· (F) if the application is not otherwise entitled to a filing date, applicant must also file a petition under 37 CFR 1.53(e) accompanied by the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(f);
· (G) applicant must supply a copy of the prior-filed application, except where the prior-filed application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111;
· (H) applicant must supply an English language translation of any prior-filed application that is in a language other than English; and
· (I) applicant must identify where the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) can be found in the prior-filed application.
The provisions set forth in 37 CFR 1.57(b) became effective on September 21, 2004 and apply to applications filed on or after that date. Thus, an application that inadvertently omits material must have been filed on or after September 21, 2004 in order for 37 CFR 1.57(b) to apply. Applicants may, however, rely on prior-filed applications filed before September 21, 2004 to supply inadvertently omitted material to applications filed on or after September 21, 2004.
There is no requirement for applicant to submit a declaration stating that the omission was inadvertent or to submit proof that a particular omission was inadvertent at the time of filing of the application. If applicant submits an amendment to add the omitted material pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b), it would constitute a certification under 37 CFR 11.18(b) that the omission was inadvertent. The Office, however, may inquire as to inadvertence where the record raises such issue.
The priority claim under 37 CFR 1.55 or the benefit claim under 37 CFR 1.78 of the prior-filed application must be present on the filing date of the later-filed application in order for it to be considered an incorporation by reference of the prior-filed application under 37 CFR 1.57(b). The later-filed application claiming benefit of the prior-filed application can be a continuation, divisional, or continuation-in-part application of the prior-filed application.
The phrase "completely contained" in 37 CFR 1.57(b) requires that the material to be added to the later-filed application under 37 CFR 1.57(b) must be expressly, as opposed to implicitly, disclosed in the prior-filed application. Furthermore, the material to be added must be completely contained in the prior-filed application as filed since it is the prior application as filed which is being incorporated under 37 CFR 1.57(b).
The application must be amended to include the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawing(s) within any time period set by the Office, but in no case later than the close of prosecution as defined in 37 CFR 1.114(b), or the abandonment of the application, whichever occurs earlier. If the Office of Patent Application Processing (OPAP) mails a "Notice of Omitted Item(s)" indicating that a portion of the specification or drawings have been omitted, any amendment pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b) should be submitted within the two month time period set in the notice and should be identified as an amendment under 37 CFR 1.57(b). The amendment must be in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b) and 1.121. See MPEP § 601.01(d) and § 601.01(g). While an amendment to include inadvertently omitted material may be submitted in reply to a final Office action which first raises the issue of the omitted material, such an amendment does not have a right of entry as it would be considered as an amendment under 37 CFR 1.116. If the application is abandoned or the prosecution is closed, applicant may file a petition to revive an application under 37 CFR 1.137 and/or a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, as appropriate, in order to restore the application to pending status and/or reopen prosecution in the application. If, however, an application has been patented, a certificate of correction or a reissue application could not be used to add inadvertently omitted material to that patent via 37 CFR 1.57(b).
In order for the omitted material to be included in the application, and hence considered to be part of the disclosure, the application must be amended to include the omitted portion. Therefore, applicants can still intentionally omit material contained in the prior-filed application from the application containing the priority or benefit claim without the material coming back in by virtue of the incorporation by reference of 37 CFR 1.57(b). Applicants can maintain their intent by simply not amending the application to include the intentionally omitted material.
In addition to filing the amendment to add the inadvertently omitted material, applicant is also required to: (A) supply a copy of the prior-filed application, except where the prior-filed application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111; (B) supply an English-language translation of any prior-filed application that is in a language other than English; and (C) identify where the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings can be found in the prior-filed application.
If an application is not otherwise entitled to a filing date under 37 CFR 1.53(b), the amendment must be by way of petition under 37 CFR 1.53(e) accompanied by the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(f). If OPAP mails a "Notice of Incomplete Application" indicating that the application lacks a specification or drawings, applicant should file a petition under 37 CFR 1.57(b) in response to the notice if applicant wants to rely on 37 CFR 1.57(b). See MPEP § 601.01(d) and § 601.01(f).
Any amendment to an international application pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b)(1) will be effective only as to the United States and shall have no effect on the international filing date of the application. The incorporation by reference relief provided in 37 CFR 1.57(b) cannot be relied upon to accord an international filing date to an international application that is not otherwise entitled to a filing date under PCT Article 11, and it cannot be relied upon to alter the international filing date accorded under PCT Article 11. In addition, no request to add the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings in an international application designating the United States will be acted upon by the Office prior to the entry and commencement of the national stage (37 CFR 1.491 ) or the filing of an application under 35 U.S.C. 111(a) which claims benefit of the international application.
Any amendment to an international design application pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b)(1) will be effective only as to the United States and shall have no effect on the filing date of the application. In addition, no request to add the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings in an international design application will be acted upon by the Office prior to the international design application becoming a nonprovisional application.
Example 1:
The Office of Patent Application Processing (OPAP) noticed that Figure 3 was omitted from the application during the initial review of the application although the specification included a description of Figure 3. The application as originally filed contained a claim under 37 CFR 1.78 for the benefit of a prior-filed application that included the appropriate Figure 3. OPAP mailed a Notice of Omitted Item(s) notifying the applicant of the omission of Figure 3 and providing a two-month period for reply.
Applicant may rely on the incorporation by reference provided by 37 CFR 1.57(b) to amend the application to add Figure 3. Applicant, however, must file the amendment to add the inadvertently omitted drawing figure in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b) within the time period set forth in the Notice of Omitted Item(s).
Example 2:
Applicant discovered that the last page of the specification is inadvertently omitted after the prosecution of the application has been closed (e.g., a final Office action, an Ex Parte Quayle action, or a notice of allowance has been mailed to the applicant). The application, as originally filed, contained a claim under 37 CFR 1.78 for the benefit of a prior-filed application that included the last page of the specification.
If applicant wishes to amend the specification to include the inadvertently omitted material, applicant must reopen the prosecution by filing a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) under 37 CFR 1.114 accompanied by the appropriate fee and an amendment in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b) within the time period for reply set forth in the last Office action (e.g., prior to payment of the issue fee, unless applicant also files a petition to withdraw the application from issue).
Example 3:
Applicant filed a (third) application that includes a claim under 37 CFR 1.78 for the benefit of a (second) prior-filed application and a (first) prior-filed application. The second application was a continuation application of the first application and the second application was abandoned after the filing of the third application. Subsequently, the applicant discovered the last page of the specification was inadvertently omitted from the third application and the second application.
If the benefit of the filing date of first application for the omitted subject matter is required (for example, the omitted material is required to provide support for the claimed subject matter of the third application and there is an intervening reference that has a prior art date prior to the filing date of the third application, but after the filing date of the first application), applicant must amend the specification of the second application and the specification of the third application to include the inadvertently omitted material in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b) (note: the second and third applications must be filed on or after September 21, 2004. Since the second application is abandoned, applicant must file a petition to revive under 37 CFR 1.137 in the second application only for the purpose of correcting the specification under 37 CFR 1.57(b) along with the amendment in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b).
Examiners may use form paragraph 6.19.02 set forth below to notify applicant that an amendment to add inadvertently omitted material pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b) is not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b). If the amendment is made to the specification and/or drawings and introduces new matter into the disclosure, form paragraph 7.28 must also be used to object to the new matter added to the disclosure, and if the amendment adds new matter to the claims or affects the claims, form paragraph 7.31.01 must also be used to reject the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112(a).
The amendment to add inadvertently omitted material pursuant to 37 CFR 1.57(b) filed [1] is not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b) because [2].
1. In bracket 1, insert the date the amendment was filed.
2. In bracket 2, insert the reason why the amendment has not been entered. For example: (1) the present application was filed before September 21, 2004, the effective date of the provisions now in 37 CFR 1.57(b) (the provisions were formerly in 37 CFR 1.57(a)); (2) the claim for priority/benefit of the prior-filed application was not present on the filing date of the present application; (3) the inadvertently omitted portion is not completely contained in the prior-filed application; (4) a copy of the prior-filed application (except where the prior-filed application is an application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111 ) was not submitted; (5) an English language translation of the prior-filed non-English language application was not submitted; or (6) applicant did not identify where the inadvertently omitted portion of the specification or drawings can be found in the prior-filed application.
3. This form paragraph must be followed by form paragraph 7.28, where the amendment is made to the specification and/or drawings and introduces new matter into the disclosure, and/or form paragraph 7.31.01, where the amendment adds new matter to the claims or affects the claims.
4. If the amendment is an after-final amendment, an advisory action should be issued indicating that the amendment raises new issues because it is not in compliance with 37 CFR 1.57(b).
5. This form paragraph should not be used if there is an express incorporation by reference since applicant would not need to comply with the requirements of 37 CFR 1.57(b).
