37 C.F.R. § 1.144

Petition from requirement for restriction

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

After a final requirement for restriction, the applicant, in addition to making any reply due on the remainder of the action, may petition the Director to review the requirement. Petition may be deferred until after final action on or allowance of claims to the invention elected, but must be filed not later than appeal. A petition will not be considered if reconsideration of the requirement was not requested (see § 1.181).

[62 FR 53195, Oct. 10, 1997]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1978–2024 · leading case: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., & Rsch. Corp. Tech., Inc. v. Pharmachemie B.V., 361 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co., & Rsch. Corp. Tech., Inc. v. Pharmachemie B.V., 361 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2004). “The only remedy available to an applicant who is dissatisfied with the restriction requirement is a petition to the Director for review: 37 C.F.R. § 1.144 . After a final requirement for restriction, the applicant, in addition to making any reply due on the remainder of the…”

In re Weber, 580 F.2d 455 (C.C.P.A. 1978). “34; 37 CFR § 1.144 . On this appeal from the rejection of claims 1-6 we do not have before us a restriction requirement under § 121.”

Conmed Corp. v. Ludlow Corp., 235 F. Supp. 2d 109 (N.D.N.Y. 2002). “See 37 C.F.R. § 1.144 (“After a final requirement for restriction, the applicant .”

Leeds v. Quigg, 745 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1990). “37 C.F.R. § 1.144 — Petition from requirement that the applicant restrict the application to one invention.”

Hyatt v. Vidal (D.D.C. 2024). “03(c) (citing 37 C.F.R. § 1.144 ). Thirty-two (32) out of 63 of Mr.”

Zachariah v. Comm'r of Patents & Trademarks, 990 F. Supp. 1404 (S.D. Fla. 1996). “37 C.F.R. § 1.144 . The Court may entertain Plaintiffs Writ of Prohibition only after Plaintiff has exhausted both of these remedies.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.