# MPEP § 1504: Examination

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504

## Section

- **Citation:** MPEP § 1504
- **Heading:** Examination
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** USPTO MPEP / Chapter 1500 - Design Patents / MPEP § 1504

## Text

In design patent applications, ornamentality, novelty, nonobviousness,
enablement, and definiteness are necessary prerequisites to the grant of a patent. The
inventive novelty or unobviousness resides in the ornamental shape or configuration of the
article in which the design is embodied or the surface ornamentation which is applied to or
embodied in the design.
Novelty and nonobviousness of a design claim must generally be determined
by a search in the pertinent design classes. It is also mandatory that the search be
extended to the mechanical classes encompassing inventions of the same general type.
Catalogs and trade journals as well as available foreign patent databases are also to be
consulted.
If the examiner determines that the claim of the design patent application
does not satisfy the statutory requirements, the examiner will set forth in detail, and may
additionally summarize, the basis for all rejections in an Office action. If a reply to an
Office action overcomes a rejection either by way of an amendment to the claim or by
providing convincing arguments that the rejection should be withdrawn, that rejection must
be indicated as withdrawn in the next Office action, unless such action is a notice of
allowability. Likewise, any amendment to the specification or claim, or new drawing or
drawing correction submitted in reply to an objection or objections in an Office action
must be acknowledged in the next Office action, unless such action is a notice of
allowability. When an examiner determines that the claim in a design application is
patentable under all statutory requirements, but formal matters still need to be addressed
and corrected prior to allowance, an
Ex parte Quayle
action will be sent
to applicant indicating allowability of the claim and identifying the necessary
corrections.

## Nearby sections

- [MPEP § 1501 Statutes and Rules Applicable](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1501.md)
- [MPEP § 1502 Definition of a Design](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1502.md)
- [MPEP § 1502.01 Distinction Between Design and Utility Patents](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1502.01.md)
- [MPEP § 1502.02 Design Patent Practitioner Bar](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1502.02.md)
- [MPEP § 1503 Elements of a Design Patent Application Filed Under 35 U.S.C. chapter 16](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1503.md)
- [MPEP § 1503.01 Specification](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1503.01.md)
- [MPEP § 1503.02 Drawing](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1503.02.md)
- [MPEP § 1504 Examination](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.md)
- [MPEP § 1504.01 Statutory Subject Matter for Designs](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.01.md)
- [MPEP § 1504.01(a) Computer-Generated Electronic Images](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.01(a).md)
- [MPEP § 1504.01(b) Design Comprising Multiple Articles or Multiple Parts Embodied in a Single Article](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.01(b).md)
- [MPEP § 1504.01(c) Lack of Ornamentality](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.01(c).md)
- [MPEP § 1504.01(d) Simulation](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.01(d).md)
- [MPEP § 1504.01(e) Offensive Subject Matter](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504.01(e).md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S1504. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.