# MPEP § 2001.06(a): Prior Art Cited in Related Foreign Applications

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(a)

## Section

- **Citation:** MPEP § 2001.06(a)
- **Heading:** Prior Art Cited in Related Foreign Applications
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** USPTO MPEP / Chapter 2000 - Duty of Disclosure / MPEP § 2001.06(a)

## Text

Applicants and other individuals, as set forth in
37 CFR 1.56
,
have a duty to bring to the attention of the Office any material prior art or other
information cited or brought to their attention in any related foreign application.
The inference that such prior art or other information is material is especially
strong where it has been used in rejecting the same or similar claims in the foreign
application or where it has been identified in some manner as particularly relevant.
See
Gemveto Jewelry Co. v. Lambert Bros., Inc.
, 542 F. Supp. 933,
216 USPQ 976 (S.D. N.Y. 1982) wherein a patent was held invalid or unenforceable
because patentee’s foreign counsel did not disclose to patentee’s United States
counsel or to the Office prior art cited by the Dutch Patent Office in connection
with the patentee’s corresponding Dutch application. The court stated, 542 F. Supp.
at 943, 216 USPQ at 985:
Foreign patent attorneys representing applicants for U.S. patents
through local correspondent firms surely must be held to the same standards of
conduct which apply to their American counterparts; a double standard of
accountability would allow foreign attorneys and their clients to escape
responsibility for fraud or inequitable conduct merely by withholding from the
local correspondent information unfavorable to patentability and claiming
ignorance of United States disclosure requirements.

## Nearby sections

- [MPEP § 2000.01 Introduction](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2000.01.md)
- [MPEP § 2001 Duty of Disclosure, Candor, and Good Faith](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.01 Who Has Duty To Disclose](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.01.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.02 [Reserved]](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.02.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.03 To Whom Duty of Disclosure Is Owed](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.03.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.04 Information Under 37 CFR 1.56(a)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.04.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.05 Materiality Under 37 CFR 1.56(b)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.05.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.06 Sources of Information under 37 CFR 1.56](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06.md)
- [MPEP § 2001.06(a) Prior Art Cited in Related Foreign Applications](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(a).md)
- [MPEP § 2001.06(b) Information Relating to or From Copending United States Patent Applications](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(b).md)
- [MPEP § 2001.06(c) Information From Related Litigation and/or Trial Proceedings](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(c).md)
- [MPEP § 2001.06(d) Information Relating to Claims Copied From a Patent](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(d).md)
- [MPEP § 2001.06(e) Information Relating to Regulatory Review](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(e).md)
- [MPEP § 2002 Disclosure — By Whom and How Made](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2002.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S2001.06(a). Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.