<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>When exactly am I required to use the status identifier
"withdrawn"?</p>
<p>I was taught, years ago, that it was up to me when if ever I
would use that status identifier. <br>
</p>
<p>Suppose there was a restriction between three independent claims
1, 2, and 3 and suppose I elect claim 2. <br>
</p>
<p>What I was taught was, I was not required to use a status
identifier of "withdrawn" for claim 1 until I was good and ready.</p>
<p>Eventually maybe the time would come that claim 2 gets allowed,
and maybe the client would be prepared to suck it up and get a
patent with only claim 2. If so, then I would cancel claim 1 and
next thing you know I would get a notice of allowance.</p>
<p>Just now I have the following sequence of events (claim numbers
changed to protect the innocent).</p>
<ul>
<li>Independent claims 1, 2, 3 filed.</li>
<li>Examiner calls on the phone, restricts saying there are three
inventions.</li>
<li>On the phone I elect claim 2.</li>
<li>Examiner mails an Office Action, memorializing the election
and rejecting claim 2.</li>
<li>I file a response to the Office Action. Claims 1 and 3 have
status identifier "original". Claim 2 has status identifier
"presently amended".</li>
<li>Examiner mails a notice of non-compliant amendment, saying
that I should have used status identifier "withdrawn" for claims
1 and 3.</li>
</ul>
<p>Question. Is this the Examiner busting my chops with a made-up
rule? Or is it really true that my hands are tied and I had no
choice but to give a status of "withdrawn" for claims 1 and 3?<br>
</p>
</body>
</html>