<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
The examiner has already established that the examiner has not done his/her job by saying he/she did a cursory review. The statement: (a) sympathizes with the examiner, (b) reminds the examiner that the examiner must consider the references, and (c) creates
a presumption that the examiner did fully consider the references unless the examiner indicates otherwise. The last one is something that might help in litigation.</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
The other options are do nothing, which leaves the examiner's cursory review statement uncontested, or resubmit the IDS, which has a number of downsides (timing issues, IDS fee issues, etc.).</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div id="Signature" class="elementToProof">
<p style="margin: 0in; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; color: rgb(31, 56, 100);"><b>Scott Nielson</b></span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; color: black;">801-660-4400</span></p>
</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<div style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,serif; font-size:11pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<hr tabindex="-1" style="display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000" style="font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Weitzmanip via Patentpractice <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, January 28, 2025 5:57 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Weitzmanip <rstraussman@weitzmanip.com>; patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Patentpractice] Examiner did not really consider IDSs -- what to do or say?</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr"></div>
<div dir="ltr">I don\u2019t see how that statement helps in a litigation - you just show that the Examiner didn\u2019t do their job, which may affect the presumption of validity. All those statements may do is cause Examiners in later similar situations to simply line
out the references. </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"> Am I missing something?</div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"> Rich Straussman </div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
On Jan 28, 2025, at 7:50\u202fPM, Timothy Snowden via Patentpractice <patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">\ufeff
<p>Helpful - thanks!<br>
</p>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">On 1/28/2025 6:35 PM, Scott Nielson via Patentpractice wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div class="x_elementToProof" style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,serif; font-size:11pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
Here is the template response I developed the last time this issue came up. Feel free to use it, suggest revisions, etc.</div>
<div class="x_elementToProof" style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,serif; font-size:11pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<p class="x_elementToProof" style="margin:12pt 0cm 6pt"><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)"><b><u>Information Disclosure Statement\u2014Cursory Review Not Allowed</u></b></span></p>
<p style="text-indent:1cm; line-height:18pt; margin:0cm 0cm 6pt"><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">The Office Action acknowledged the submission of the information disclosure statement dated [</span><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0); background-color:aqua">date</span><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">]
but stated that the listed items were only given a cursory review due to time constraints. Office Action, pp.
</span><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0); background-color:aqua">__</span><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">. Applicant is sympathetic to the time constraints involved
in examining a patent application. However, the applicable rules do not permit a cursory review of information submitted in an information disclosure statement.
</span></p>
<p style="text-indent:1cm; line-height:18pt; margin:0cm 0cm 6pt"><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">The MPEP explains that an information disclosure statement filed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.97 and 1.98 \u201cwill be
considered by the examiner assigned to the application.\u201d MPEP 609. The \u201cexaminer has an obligation to consider the information,\u201d which means \u201cconsidering the documents in the same manner as other documents in Office search files are considered by the examiner
while conducting a search of the prior art in a proper field of search.\u201d <i>Id.</i> Initialing the item or an equivalent acknowledgement means \u201cthat the information has been considered by the examiner to the extent noted above.\u201d
<i>Id.</i> There is no provision for performing a cursory review of the items.</span></p>
<p class="x_elementToProof" style="text-indent:1cm; line-height:18pt; margin:0cm 0cm 6pt">
<span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">Applicant will assume that the Examiner has reviewed these comments and fully considered all the items listed in the information disclosure statement in accordance with MPEP 069
unless the Examiner states otherwise in a future communication.</span></p>
<p class="x_elementToProof" style="text-indent:1cm; line-height:18pt; margin:0cm 0cm 6pt">
<span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",serif; font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br>
</span></p>
<div class="x_elementToProof" style="margin:12pt 0cm 6pt; font-family:"Aptos Serif",Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,serif; font-size:11pt; color:rgb(31,56,100)">
<b>Scott Nielson</b></div>
<div class="x_elementToProof" id="x_Signature">
<p style="margin:0in; font-family:Calibri,sans-serif; font-size:11pt"><span style="font-family:"Aptos Serif",Aptos_EmbeddedFont,Aptos_MSFontService,serif; color:black">801-660-4400</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<span>-- </span><br>
<span>Patentpractice mailing list</span><br>
<span>Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</span><br>
<span>http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</span><br>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>