Appeal No. 98-0532
Application 07/996,382
We agree with the examiner that the granting of
additional reissue patents for the purpose of covering
separate and distinct inventions has specifically been
addressed in Section 251. However, the examiner’s conclusion
that multiple reissue patents can be issued only for “separate
and distinct parts of the thing patented” has specifically
been repudiated by the Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit. In In re Graff, 111 F.3d 874, 876, 42 USPQ2d 1471,
1473 (Fed. Cir. 1997), when considering the Board’s affirmance
of a final rejection of claims in a continuation reissue
application for essentially the same reason as the instant
case , our reviewing court stated that3
§251 does not bar multiple reissue patents in
appropriate circumstances. Section 251[3] provides
that the general rules for patent applications apply
also to reissue applications, and §251[2] expressly
recognizes that there may be more than one reissue
patent for distinct and separate parts of the thing
patented. The statute does not prohibit divisional
or continuation reissue applications, and does not
place stricter limitations on such applications when
they are presented by reissue, provided of course
that the statutory requirements specific to reissue
3The Board’s decision on the propriety of the continuation
reissue was, however, affirmed on the basis that it contained
broadened claims which were filed more than two years after
the date of the original patent.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007