MPEP Section 2689, Reexamination Review
This document contains one section of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (the "M.P.E.P."), Eighth Edition, Fifth Revision (August 2006). This page was last updated in July 2007. You may return to the section index to find a particular section. Alternatively, you may search the MPEP use the search box that appears on the bottom of every page of BitLaw--be sure to restrict your search to the MPEP in the pop-up list.
2689 Reexamination Review [R-7]
After a reexamination case is acted on by the examiner and all premailing clerical processing is completed, the case is forwarded to the **>Central Reexamination Unit (CRU) Supervisory Patent Examiner (SPE) or Technology Center (TC) Quality Assurance Specialist (QAS)<. The *>CRU SPE/TC QAS< (with the aid of the paralegals or other technical support who might be assigned as backup) will then (A) procedurally review the examiner's action for compliance with the applicable provisions of the reexamination statute and regulations, and with reexamination policy, practice and procedure, (B) do a completeness review of the action to ensure that all issues and arguments raised by all parties are appropriately developed, considered and addressed, and that all materials of the action (e.g., references, forms and cover sheets) are present and appropriately completed and (C) hand carry any paper parts of the file directly to the Reexamination Legal Advisor (RLA). The RLA will do a general review of the examiner's action for correct application of reexamination law, rules, procedure and policy.
In addition to the *>CRU SPE/TC QAS< review of the reexamination cases, a panel review is made prior to issuing Office actions as set forth in MPEP § 2671.03.
After a Notice of Intent to Issue Inter Partes Reexamination Certificate (NIRC) has been issued and prosecution has been terminated, the reexamination case is screened by the Office of Patent Legal Administration for obvious errors and proper preparation, in order to issue a reexamination certificate. The above identified review processes are appropriate vehicles for providing information on the uniformity of practice, identifying problem areas and providing feedback to the Office personnel that process and examine reexamination cases.