1

What is the rationale behind writing the term inventions, species, or groups, while raising a restriction requirement. How these three nomenclatures (invention, group, and species) are different and what is the basis for using these three by the Examiners?

0

Most of the jurisdiction adopt one invention one patent system to improve the prosecution of the patent application and must relate to a single general inventive concept.

How these three nomenclatures (invention, group, and species) are different and what is the basis for using these three by the Examiners?

For Eg: There is pharma patent application which contains

  1. Formulation
  2. Dosage,
  3. Method of treatment etc.,

these are all different inventions and don't satisfy relate to a single general inventive concept a restriction requirement of which invention to be examined.

in the above example when election of 1.Formulation patent there are two groups in the same

  1. Formulation composition
  2. Method of manufacture both are different and not relate to a single general inventive concept this would invite a restriction for the group of the same invention which is to be examined.

in the above scenario when a election is made for 1.formulation composition which consists of mixture of sugars, solvents, buffers etc., then the restriction would be asked for the species as sugars can be reducing/ non reducing , solvents can be aqueous/Non-Aqueous.

Such restriction are given as long as examiner is satisfied that the claims relate to a single general inventive concept.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.