<img width="1" height="1" src="https://gcfagjf.r.af.d.sendibt2.com/tr/op/zSYldlsdb7rMRquy1_VdLxoPFPe38dUAeEVRXrFJnCmNsAb28REeSueB4-EosY0txQB-5LLEolfCdX1dVq7LhU8SqfW_Q9f1j_u0eoUpa9H_RsgUki3FnxcmbPKrcrrCrEZMY4rtksXm-VjkPG-Yy2i3fcnESxcKB4rENb3YmZs-1ammObTmSzA2WpGiRtGV7wual0PtkHDB4bWmiL6trvnaJZ0Y8iqUoTL0" style="mso-hide:all"/><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Seems to me that that's covered by 35 USC 119(b)(e) and 37 CFR 1.55(g)(3)(iii): the examiner can ask for such a translation. It doesn't appear that that's what rule 105 is about.</div><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Jun 1, 2025 at 11:25\u202fAM Randall Svihla <<a href="mailto:rsvihla@nsiplaw.com">rsvihla@nsiplaw.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div class="msg2009678268763553510">
<div lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div class="m_2009678268763553510WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">What if the priority documents are not in English?<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Randall S. Svihla<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">NSIP Law<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif">Washington, D.C.<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Arial"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(225,225,225) currentcolor currentcolor;padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-weight:bold">From:</span></font></b><span> Patentpractice <<a href="mailto:patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">patentpractice-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">On Behalf Of </span></b>Daniel Feigelson via Patentpractice<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Sent:</span></b> Sunday, June 1, 2025 4:20 AM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">To:</span></b> For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <<a href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Cc:</span></b> Daniel Feigelson <<a href="mailto:djf@4d-ip.com" target="_blank">djf@4d-ip.com</a>><br>
<b><span style="font-weight:bold">Subject:</span></b> Re: [Patentpractice] Responding to a Rule 105 Request for Information<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:10pt;border:1pt solid windowtext;padding:0in"><img width="1" height="1" id="m_2009678268763553510Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:ii_1972a9c9b3bbee2ed7e1" alt="Image removed by sender."></span></font><font size="2"><span style="font-size:10pt"><u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt">I've never had a request under Rule 105. But I don't see in the wording of the rule how 105 authorizes an examiner to ask for information about "the appropriate priority date"
of a claim. 105 deals with providing information regarding prior art or the finding of prior art, which is why it refers to rule 56. Entitlement to priority (or to the benefit of an earlier filing date) is (a) tangential to finding prior art (it determines
whether or not a publication may be cited against a particular claim, but is not necessary for finding the publication), and (b) something that the examiner can determine on his own: he can read through the priority document(s) and/or the earlier US applications
for which the benefit of an earlier filing date is claimed, and determine earliest priority or benefit date for each claim.<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt">Does anyone know what statutory section serves as the basis for rule 105?<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt">Dan<u></u><u></u></span></font></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font size="2" face="Calibri"><span style="font-size:11pt"> </span></font></p><div><blockquote style="border-width:medium medium medium 1pt;border-style:none none none solid;border-color:currentcolor currentcolor currentcolor rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in"><div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></blockquote></div></div>