Request for Comments on Interim Guidelines for Reexamination of Cases in View of In re Portola Packaging, Inc., 110 F.3d 786, 42 USPQ2d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 1997)
The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) requests comments from the public on interim guidelines that will be used by PTO personnel in their review of requests for reexaminations and ongoing reexaminations for compliance with the decision in In re Portola Packaging, Inc., 110 F.3d 786, 42 USPQ2d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
- Task
- Read the news
- Patent or trademark
- both
- Legacy system
- —
- Current entry point
- www.federalregister.gov/documents/1998/06/15/98-15778/request-for-comments-on-interim-guidelines-for-reexamination-of-cases-in-view-of-in-re-portola (permanent link in the Federal Register, verified 2026-09-30)
- Legacy system and where it moved
- No legacy system name mention in title or summary )
- Fee
- No fee mention in title or summary )
- What you need (account or API key)
- No account or key mention in title or summary )
- Published
- 1998-06-15
- Document type
- Notice
- Source
- USPTO documents published in the Federal Register (Federal Register API)(retrieved 2026-10-06)
Everything in the same category
Read the news (all 1988) · both (all 2333)
Related entry points
- Guidelines for Reexamination of Cases in View of In re Portola Packaging, Inc., 110 F.3d 786, 42 USPQ2d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 1997)
- Request for Comments on Interim Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. 112 para. 1 ``Written Description'' Requirement
- Revised Interim Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. Sec. 112, para. 1 ``Written Description'' Requirement; Request for Comments
- Revised Utility Examination Guidelines; Request for Comments
- Interim Guidelines for the Examination of Claims Directed to Species of Chemical Compositions Based Upon a Single Prior Art Reference
- Interim Guidelines for Examination of Design Patent Applications for Computer-Generated Icons
- Interim Supplemental Examination Guidelines for Determining the Applicability of 35 U.S.C. 112 para. 6
- Guidelines for Assessing Enablement in Utility Applications and Patents in View of the Supreme Court Decision in Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi et al.
- Request for Comments on Proposed Utility Examination Guidelines
- Request for Comments on Proposed Examination Guidelines for Computer-Implemented Inventions
- Request for Comments on Interim Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications for Patent Subject Matter Eligibility
- Request for Comments on Interim Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications for Patent Subject Matter Eligibility
- Utility Examination Guidelines
- Guidelines for Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. 112, ¶ 1, “Written Description” Requirement
- Examination Guidelines Update: Developments in the Obviousness Inquiry After KSR v.Teleflex
- Interim Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility for Process Claims in View of Bilski v. Kappos