JusticeSeekr
New Member
- Jurisdiction
- Pennsylvania
Hello. I submitted a Non Provisional application to the US Patent Office over a year ago and have just heard from an Examiner. The Examiner asked if I was being represented by an attorney and I told him that I was Pro Se. He went on to say that at a glance, my invention appears to be two inventions. And that's without delving too much into my case. He said it may be better to Claim 1 plus dependents 4, 6, and 8. Or Claim 2 plus dependents 3, 5, and 7. I take exception to this because my invention is one platform that facilitates certain transactions online. He said that thousands of transactions are done online so what makes mine so unique? Of course, if he delved deeper into my case he would know why. A system and method for treatment of a medium is disclosed in the application.
Nonetheless, he is asking me to elect for an oral or written restriction, with or without traverse. He said I can always add more claims latter, but probably not the excluded claims. He said I could file a separate patent for the excluded claims. Once I make my election he said that I can request a phone interview where we could delve further into the case, which seems to be putting the cart before the horse to me.
The Examiner has obviously determined that a serious burden would exist if a restriction were not required. I on the other hand feel that no restriction is required. I only have 8 claims which is considerably less than many patents I have seen and each one supports the other. So, I see no need for a division which only stretches this process out longer than I would care for and racks up additional fees and costs for the Patent Office. Any suggestions on what I should or could do? Thank you.
Nonetheless, he is asking me to elect for an oral or written restriction, with or without traverse. He said I can always add more claims latter, but probably not the excluded claims. He said I could file a separate patent for the excluded claims. Once I make my election he said that I can request a phone interview where we could delve further into the case, which seems to be putting the cart before the horse to me.
The Examiner has obviously determined that a serious burden would exist if a restriction were not required. I on the other hand feel that no restriction is required. I only have 8 claims which is considerably less than many patents I have seen and each one supports the other. So, I see no need for a division which only stretches this process out longer than I would care for and racks up additional fees and costs for the Patent Office. Any suggestions on what I should or could do? Thank you.
