C.F.R. » Title 37 » CHAPTER I—UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 1—RULES OF PRACTICE IN PATENT CASES › Subpart B—National Processing Provisions

37 C.F.R. § 1.221

Voluntary publication or republication of patent application publication

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

(a) Any request for publication of an application filed before, but pending on, November 29, 2000, and any request for republication of an application previously published under § 1.211, must include a copy of the application in compliance with the USPTO patent electronic filing system requirements and be accompanied by the publication fee set forth in § 1.18(d) and the processing fee set forth in § 1.17(i). If the request does not comply with the requirements of this paragraph or the copy of the application does not comply with the USPTO patent electronic filing system requirements, the Office will not publish the application and will refund the publication fee.

(b) The Office will grant a request for a corrected or revised patent application publication other than as provided in paragraph (a) of this section only when the Office makes a material mistake which is apparent from Office records. Any request for a corrected or revised patent application publication other than as provided in paragraph (a) of this section must be filed within two months from the date of the patent application publication. This period is not extendable.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2008–2008 · leading case: E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. MacDermid Printing Solutions, LLC, 525 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. MacDermid Printing Solutions, LLC, 525 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008). “Further, DuPont could have corrected its published application under 37 C.F.R. § 1.221 and MPEP § 1130. While failure to make such a correction may have potential consequences, 6 we see no reason why failure to correct a published application should prevent the patentee from…”
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.