MPEP Q & A 5: Situations in Which Drawings are Not Considered Necessary

mpep-podcast-800

Question:

List a situation in which drawings are usually not considered necessary for the  understanding of the invention.

Answer:

It has been USPTO practice to treat an application that contains at least one process or method claim as an application for which a drawing is not necessary for an understanding of the invention. Other situations in which drawings are usually not considered necessary for the understanding of the invention are:

  • Coated articles or products;
  • Articles made from a particular material or composition;
  • Laminated structures;
  • Articles, apparatus, or systems where sole distinguishing feature is presence of a particular material.

Chapter Details:

The answer to this question can be found in chapter 600 of the MPEP. This chapter covers the parts, form and content of the application.

The answer is from the 9th Edition, Revision 07.2015. Depending on future changes to the MPEP, the question and answer may or may not be applicable in later Editions or revisions.

Section Summary:

The answer to this question can be found in chapter 600 of the MPEP. This chapter covers the parts, form and content of the application.

601.01(f)    Applications Filed Without Drawings

An “applicant shall furnish a drawing where necessary for the understanding of the subject matter sought to be patented.” Applications filed without drawings are initially inspected to determine whether a drawing is referred to in the specification, and if not, whether a drawing is necessary for the understanding of the invention.

This section covers what happens in instances where the application does not require a drawing as well as those that do require drawings, but was filed without.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *