Addressing USPTO Office Action
A client received an office action from the USPTO indicating that important claims from their patent were rejected because they were obvious and lacked novelty. Review by knowledgeable BioPhia team members were able to develop a response to the USPTO to provide a rationale for the inclusion of the claims
Situation:
A client received an office action from the USPTO indicating important claims for their patent were rejected because they were obvious and thus lacked novelty.
BioPhia Role:
BioPhia was engaged to review the situation and provide an expert opinion for the office action.
Action:
A team was assembled familiar with the technical area and with experience in patents and USPTO office actions. Review of the literature pertinent to the patent claims and a letter outlining the novelty of the claims was completed based on prior art and standard approaches in the field of interest.
Result:
The information and letter were used by the client to respond to the USPTO.