{"id":1035,"date":"2022-02-03T20:17:03","date_gmt":"2022-02-03T20:17:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/?page_id=1035"},"modified":"2022-02-03T20:17:03","modified_gmt":"2022-02-03T20:17:03","slug":"what-is-double-patenting","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/resources\/patent-prosecution\/what-is-double-patenting\/","title":{"rendered":"What is Double Patenting"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<div class=\"wp-block-columns is-layout-flex wp-container-core-columns-is-layout-9d6595d7 wp-block-columns-is-layout-flex\">\n<div class=\"wp-block-column is-layout-flow wp-block-column-is-layout-flow\">\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-large is-resized\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/img_18-1024x46.png\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-496\" width=\"1138\" height=\"51\" srcset=\"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/img_18-1024x46.png 1024w, https:\/\/inventedly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/img_18-300x14.png 300w, https:\/\/inventedly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/img_18-768x35.png 768w, https:\/\/inventedly.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/img_18.png 1280w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 1138px) 100vw, 1138px\" \/><\/figure>\n\n\n<div class=\"aioseo-breadcrumbs\"><span class=\"aioseo-breadcrumb\">\n\t\t\tHome\n\t\t<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n<h2 class=\"has-text-color wp-block-heading\" id=\"what-is-double-patenting\" style=\"color:#0461ce\"><a>What is Double Patenting<\/a>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-text-color has-background is-style-wide\" style=\"background-color:#0461ce;color:#0461ce\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"has-drop-cap\">There are generally two types of double patenting rejections. One is the \u201csame invention\u201d type double patenting rejection based on 35 U.S.C. 101 which states in the singular that an inventor \u201cmay obtain a patent.\u201d The second is the \u201cnonstatutory-type\u201d double patenting rejection based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy and which is primarily intended to prevent prolongation of the patent term by prohibiting claims in a second patent not patentably distinct from claims in a first patent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The doctrine of nonstatutory double patenting also seeks to prevent the possibility of multiple suits against an accused infringer by different assignees of patents claiming patentably indistinct variations of the same invention. In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 944-48, 214 USPQ 761, 767-70 (CCPA 1982). The submission of a terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b) to overcome a double patenting rejection ensures that a patent owner with multiple patents claiming obvious variations of one invention retains all those patents or sells them as a group. Van Ornum, 686 F.2d at 944-45, 214 USPQ at 767.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Nonstatutory double patenting includes rejections based on anticipation, a one-way determination of \u201cobviousness,\u201d or a two-way determination of \u201cobviousness.\u201d It is important to note that the \u201cobviousness\u201d analysis for \u201cobviousness-type\u201d double-patenting is \u201csimilar to, but not necessarily the same as, that undertaken under 35 U.S.C. 103.\u201d In re Braat, 937 F.2d 589, 592-93, 19 USPQ2d 1289, 1292 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (citing In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 892 n.4, 225 USPQ 645, 648 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 1985)); Geneva Pharmaceuticals, 349 F.3d 1373, 1378 n.1, 68 USPQ2d 1865, 1869 n.1 (Fed. Cir. 2003). In addition, nonstatutory double patenting also includes rejections based on the equitable principle against permitting an unjustified timewise extension of patent rights. See In re Schneller, 397 F.2d 350, 158 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1968)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>What is Double Patenting? There are generally two types of double patenting rejections. One is the \u201csame invention\u201d type double patenting rejection based on 35 U.S.C. 101 which states in the singular that an inventor \u201cmay obtain a patent.\u201d The second is the \u201cnonstatutory-type\u201d double patenting rejection based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":965,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1035","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1035","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1035"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1035\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1063,"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1035\/revisions\/1063"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/965"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/inventedly.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1035"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}