3

USPTO's PatFT provides functionality for this. In particular, the re-examination certificate (REEX, where REEX=YES refers to a certificate of re-examination being present) and current CPC classification class (CPCL) are probably be relevant. The query REEX/YES and CPCL/F25B seems to provide what you want.


3

I'm not a lawyer, and the facts of any particular case are determined by its specifics. Thus, you won't get a definitive answer here since you can't disclose your invention. That said, I have a few comments on your question. If your invention is something new, then it isn't mentioned in the previous patent. They can't just add new claims that aren't ...


2

A claim that survived reexamination is stronger afterwards than it was before. By definition, a claim that was originally dependent is narrower than the original independent claim. After reexamination the former dependent claim would be re-written in independent form. In general, the patent would cover a narrower territory, but be somewhat strengthened in ...


2

This is a US/USPTO answer. It is not clear what the situation might be. I have seen a case where original independent claims were all canceled and new independent claims submitted and the examiner declared a "restriction by original presentation" or similar words. A restriction is properly issued when the initial claim set contains claims to more ...


1

No The relevant CRF says - 37 CFR 1.103  Suspension of action by the Office. (a) Suspension for cause. On request of the applicant, the Office may grant a suspension of action by the Office under this paragraph for good and sufficient cause. The Office will not suspend action if a reply by applicant to an Office action is outstanding. Any petition for ...


1

To find a reexamination record look up the patent application for the issued patent in Public PAIR. Under the Continuity tab will be a list of child applications (if any) and reexaminations (if any).


1

The grounds for an exparte reexamination are restricted to novelty and obvious challenges based on patents or published documents and on section 112 issues. Section 112 includes the requirement for proper support for claims in the specification, the claims not being indeterminate, and the specification being enabling. The allowed grounds do not include ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible