skip to content »

Updating dd form 93

updating dd form 93-11

The USPTO will not return papers simply because they do not comply with 37 CFR 1.52.Legibility includes ability to be photocopied and scanned so that suitable reprints can be made and paper can be electronically reproduced by use of digital imaging and optical character recognition.

updating dd form 93-5updating dd form 93-71

Otherwise, the inventor may need to execute a new inventor’s oath or declaration. When an applicant requests that the USPTO provide a certified copy of an application-as-filed and pays the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.19(b)(1), the USPTO will make a copy of the application-as-filed from the records in the IFW database (or the microfilm database).Some of the patent application papers received by the U. Patent and Trademark Office are copies of the original, ribbon copy.These are acceptable if, in the opinion of the Office, they are legible and permanent.The abstract must commence on a separate sheet and any sheet including an abstract or portion of an abstract may not contain any other parts of the application or other material (37 CFR 1.72(b)). See 37 CFR 1.125 for filing rewritten papers constituting a substitute specification required by the Office. All papers which are to become a part of the permanent records of the U. Patent and Trademark Office must be legibly written either by a typewriter or mechanical printer in permanent dark ink or its equivalent in portrait orientation on flexible, strong, smooth, nonshiny, durable, and white paper.All application papers that are submitted on paper or by facsimile transmission which are to become a part of the permanent record of the U. Patent and Trademark Office must be on sheets of paper which are the same size (for example, an amendment should not have two different sizes of paper, but the specification can have one size of paper and the drawings a different size) and are either 21.0 cm. Typed, mimeographed, xeroprinted, multigraphed or nonsmearing carbon copy forms of reproduction are acceptable.An application should not be classified for publication under 35 U. For design application practice, see MPEP § 1504et seq. If a newly filed application obviously fails to disclose an invention with the clarity required by 35 U. If such information is included in the written description, the examiner will object to the specification and require applicant to take appropriate action, e.g., cancel the information.

See MPEP § 714.25 for information pertaining to amendments and other papers presented in violation of 37 CFR 1.3. The specification must commence on a separate sheet.

This requires a high contrast, with black lines and a white background.

Gray lines and/or a gray background sharply reduce photo reproduction quality.

That is, the claim(s), abstract and sequence listings (if any) should each begin on a new page since each of these sections (specification, abstract, claims, sequence listings) of the disclosure are separately indexed in the Image File Wrapper (IFW). Applicant’s cooperation is requested in correcting any errors of which applicant may become aware in the specification.

There should be no overlap on a single page of more than one section of the disclosure. Certain cross references to other related applications may be made. applications identified only by the attorney’s docket number may be amended to properly identify the earlier application(s). As the specification is never returned to applicant under any circumstances, the applicant should retain an accurate copy thereof. The pages of the specification including claims and abstract must be numbered consecutively, starting with 1, the numbers being centrally located above or preferably, below, the text.

The claim(s), abstract and sequence listing (if any) should not be included on a sheet including any other part of the application (37 CFR 1.71(f)). Applicants must make every effort to file patent applications, and papers that are to become a part of the permanent United States Patent and Trademark Office records in the file of a patent application or a reexamination proceeding, in a form that is clear and reproducible.