Browse Arkansas Code titles and sections
35 U.S.C. § 134 — Appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Patent Applicant.—** An applicant for a patent, any of whose claims has been twice rejected, may appeal from the decision of the primary examiner to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, having once paid the fee for such appeal.
**(b) Patent Owner.—** A patent owner in a reexamination may appeal from the final rejection of any claim by the primary examiner to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, having once paid the fee for such appeal.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 134
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. A text match is a research starting point; applicability is not established.
Original supplied file — preserved unchanged
Download original Markdown file
File SHA-256: 9098bb3d579a745d82af583207ad2f40dba11e72203f4bc00ec33b742bf6e784. The original may include catalog metadata, neighboring provisions, or embedded records outside this collection's scope. Search shows only the selected federal record. Historical editions and unverified snapshots are not a statement of current law.
Authority boundary: historical or unconfirmed source not current law verified.
Open the recorded source website ↗
Record provenance
Stable record: federal_law:legal_authorities:record_usc_9def187dece50af61b549cb2
Source file: Laws/federal/codes/united-states-code/title-35/section-134-appeal-to-the-patent-trial-and-appeal-board--b06ea14953.md
Pages: Not recorded – Not recorded
Passage SHA-256: d2334f75d30f5ea5ae00f678243c68e12084ac90fbdf63f9aaa78f3576474003
Source location: Title 35, Chapter 12, § 134; chapter-012-examination-of-application.md
Stored source content
**(a) Patent Applicant.—** An applicant for a patent, any of whose claims has been twice rejected, may appeal from the decision of the primary examiner to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, having once paid the fee for such appeal.
**(b) Patent Owner.—** A patent owner in a reexamination may appeal from the final rejection of any claim by the primary examiner to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, having once paid the fee for such appeal.
Cross-references
Connections may be documented source relationships, shared citations or nearby passages. Each explains its basis; a connection alone does not establish applicability to your situation.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
When used in this title unless the context otherwise indicates—
**(a)** The term “invention” means invention or discovery.
**(b)** The term “process” means process, art or method, and includes a new use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or material.
**(c)** The terms “United States” and “this country” mean the United States of America, its territories and possessions.
**(d)** The word “patentee” includes not only the patentee to whom the patent was issued but also the successors in title to the patentee.
**(e)** The term “third-party requester” means a person requesting ex parte reexamination under section 302 who is not the patent owner.
**(f)** The term “inventor” means the individual or, if a joint invention, the individuals collectively who invented or discovered the subject matter of the invention.
**(g)** The terms “joint inventor” and “coinventor” mean any 1 of the individuals who invented or discovered the subject matter of a joint invention.
**(h)** The term “joint research agreement” means a written contract, grant, or cooperative agreement entered into by 2 or more persons or entities for the performance of experimental, developmental, or research work in the field of the claimed invention.
**(i)**
(1) The term “effective filing date” for a claimed invention in a patent or application for patent means—
(A) if subparagraph (B) does not apply, the actual filing date of the patent or the application for the patent containing a claim to the invention; or
(B) the filing date of the earliest application for which the patent or application is entitled, as to such invention, to a right of priority under section 119, 365(a), 365(b), 386(a), or 386(b) or to the benefit of an earlier filing date under section 120, 121, 365(
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 100
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) In General.—** There shall be in the Office a Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Director, the Deputy Director, the Commissioner for Patents, the Commissioner for Trademarks, and the administrative patent judges shall constitute the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The administrative patent judges shall be persons of competent legal knowledge and scientific ability who are appointed by the Secretary, in consultation with the Director. Any reference in any Federal law, Executive order, rule, regulation, or delegation of authority, or any document of or pertaining to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences is deemed to refer to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
**(b) Duties.—** The Patent Trial and Appeal Board shall—
(1) on written appeal of an applicant, review adverse decisions of examiners upon applications for patents pursuant to section 134(a);
(2) review appeals of reexaminations pursuant to section 134(b);
(3) conduct derivation proceedings pursuant to section 135; and
(4) conduct inter partes reviews and post-grant reviews pursuant to chapters 31 and 32.
**(c) 3-Member Panels.—** Each appeal, derivation proceeding, post-grant review, and inter partes review shall be heard by at least 3 members of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, who shall be designated by the Director. Only the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may grant rehearings.
**(d) Treatment of Prior Appointments.—** The Secretary of Commerce may, in the Secretary’s discretion, deem the appointment of an administrative patent judge who, before the date of the enactment of this subsection, held office pursuant to an appointment by the Director to take effect on the date on which the Director initially appointed the administrative patent judge. It shall be a defense to a challenge to the appo
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 6
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) General Fees.—** The Director shall charge the following fees:
(1) **Filing and basic national fees.—**
(A) On filing each application for an original patent, except for design, plant, or provisional applications, $330.
(B) On filing each application for an original design patent, $220.
(C) On filing each application for an original plant patent, $220.
(D) On filing each provisional application for an original patent, $220.
(E) On filing each application for the reissue of a patent, $330.
(F) The basic national fee for each international application filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) entering the national stage under section 371, $330.
(G) In addition, excluding any sequence listing or computer program listing filed in an electronic medium as prescribed by the Director, for any application the specification and drawings of which exceed 100 sheets of paper (or equivalent as prescribed by the Director if filed in an electronic medium), $270 for each additional 50 sheets of paper (or equivalent as prescribed by the Director if filed in an electronic medium) or fraction thereof.
(2) **Excess claims fees.—**
(A) *In general.—* — In addition to the fee specified in paragraph (1)—
(i) on filing or on presentation at any other time, $220 for each claim in independent form in excess of 3;
(ii) on filing or on presentation at any other time, $52 for each claim (whether dependent or independent) in excess of 20; and
(iii) for each application containing a multiple dependent claim, $390.
(B) *Multiple dependent claims.—* — For the purpose of computing fees under subparagraph (A), a multiple dependent claim referred to in section 112 or any claim depending therefrom shall be considered as separate dependent claims in ac
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 41
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Examinations.—** An applicant who is dissatisfied with the final decision in an appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under section 134(a) may appeal the Board’s decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. By filing such an appeal, the applicant waives his or her right to proceed under section 145.
**(b) Reexaminations.—** A patent owner who is dissatisfied with the final decision in an appeal of a reexamination to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under section 134(b) may appeal the Board’s decision only to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
**(c) Post-Grant and Inter Partes Reviews.—** A party to an inter partes review or a post-grant review who is dissatisfied with the final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board under section 318(a) or 328(a) (as the case may be) may appeal the Board’s decision only to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
**(d) Derivation Proceedings.—** A party to a derivation proceeding who is dissatisfied with the final decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in the proceeding may appeal the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, but such appeal shall be dismissed if any adverse party to such derivation proceeding, within 20 days after the appellant has filed notice of appeal in accordance with section 142, files notice with the Director that the party elects to have all further proceedings conducted as provided in section 146. If the appellant does not, within 30 days after the filing of such notice by the adverse party, file a civil action under section 146, the Board’s decision shall govern the further proceedings in the case.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 141
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
An applicant dissatisfied with the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an appeal under section 134(a) may, unless appeal has been taken to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, have remedy by civil action against the Director in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia if commenced within such time after such decision, not less than sixty days, as the Director appoints. The court may adjudge that such applicant is entitled to receive a patent for his invention, as specified in any of his claims involved in the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, as the facts in the case may appear and such adjudication shall authorize the Director to issue such patent on compliance with the requirements of law. All the expenses of the proceedings shall be paid by the applicant.
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 145
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
**(a) Infringer’s Civil Action.—**
(1) **Inter partes review barred by civil action.—** — An inter partes review may not be instituted if, before the date on which the petition for such a review is filed, the petitioner or real party in interest filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent.
(2) **Stay of civil action.—** — If the petitioner or real party in interest files a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent on or after the date on which the petitioner files a petition for inter partes review of the patent, that civil action shall be automatically stayed until either—
(A) the patent owner moves the court to lift the stay;
(B) the patent owner files a civil action or counterclaim alleging that the petitioner or real party in interest has infringed the patent; or
(C) the petitioner or real party in interest moves the court to dismiss the civil action.
(3) **Treatment of counterclaim.—** — A counterclaim challenging the validity of a claim of a patent does not constitute a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of a patent for purposes of this subsection.
**(b) Patent Owner’s Action.—** An inter partes review may not be instituted if the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent. The time limitation set forth in the preceding sentence shall not apply to a request for joinder under subsection (c).
**(c) Joinder.—** If the Director institutes an inter partes review, the Director, in his or her discretion, may join as a party to that inter partes review any person who properly files a petition under section 311 that the Director,
Source: Supplied U.S. Code snapshot — release unconfirmed · 35 U.S.C. § 315
Stored review status: release_metadata_unconfirmed. Incoming connection: Explicit cross-reference supplied in source Markdown; currentness and applicability require review.
Federal law — U.S. Code and appendices · legal_authorities
Page 61
TITLE 35—PATENTS
§ 134
therein, of which notice has been given or
mailed to the applicant, or within such shorter
time, not less than thirty days, as fixed by the
Director in such action, the application shall be
regarded as abandoned by the parties thereto.
(July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 801; Pub. L.
106–113,
div.
B,
§ 1000(a)(9)
[title
IV,
§ 4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536,
1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III,
§ 13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906; Pub.
L. 112–211, title II, § 202(b)(5), Dec. 18, 2012, 126
Stat. 1536.)
HISTORICAL AND REVISION NOTES
Based on Title 35, U.S.C., 1946 ed., § 37 (R.S. 4894,
amended (1) Mar. 3, 1897, ch. 391, § 4, 29 Stat. 692, 693, (2)
July 6, 1916, ch. 225, § 1, 39 Stat. 345, 347–8, (3) Mar. 2,
1927, ch. 273, § 1, 44 Stat. 1335, (4) Aug. 7, 1939, ch. 568, 53
Stat. 1264).
The opening clause of the corresponding section of
existing statute is omitted as having no present day
meaning or value and the last two sentences are omit-
ted for inclusion in section 267. The notice is stated as
given or mailed. Language is revised.
Editorial Notes
AMENDMENTS
2012—Pub. L. 112–211 struck out ‘‘, unless it be shown
to the satisfaction of the Director that such delay was
unavoidable’’ before period at end.
2002—Pub. L. 107–273 made technical correction to di-
rectory language of Pub. L. 106–113. See 1999 Amend-
ment note below.
1999—Pub. L. 106–113, as amended by Pub. L. 107–273,
substituted ‘‘Director’’ for ‘‘Commissioner’’ in two
places.
Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries
EFFECTIVE DATE OF 2012 AMENDMENT
Amendment by Pub. L. 112–211 effective on the date
that is 1 year after Dec. 18, 2012, applicable to patents
issued before, on, or after that effective date and pat
Source: Supplied 2024 U.S. Code historical extraction · 35 U.S.C. § 134
Stored review status: historical_2024_not_currentness_verified. Same stored citation; legal effect and authority still require review.