# MPEP § 704.11(b): When May a Requirement for Information Be Made

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.11(b)

## Section

- **Citation:** MPEP § 704.11(b)
- **Heading:** When May a Requirement for Information Be Made
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** USPTO MPEP / Chapter 0700 - Examination of Applications / MPEP § 704.11(b)

## Text

A requirement for information under
37 CFR 1.105
is
discretionary. A requirement may be made at any time once the necessity for it is
recognized and should be made at the earliest opportunity after the necessity is
recognized. The optimum time for making a requirement is prior to or with a first
action on the merits because the examiner has the maximum opportunity to consider and
apply the response. Ordinarily, a request for information should not be made with or
after a final rejection.
I.
PRIOR TO THE FIRST ACTION ON THE MERITS
It may be appropriate to make a requirement for information prior
to the first action on the merits, such as with a restriction requirement, when
the examiner’s search and preliminary analysis demonstrates that the claimed
subject matter cannot be adequately searched by class or keyword among patents or
in areas of emerging technology where the Office has minimal prior art.
Factors to be considered for the appropriateness of a separate
requirement for information prior to the first action on the merits include:
(A) Whether the claimed subject matter is in a newly established
art area without a well-developed prior art resource pool;
(B) Whether the applicant submitted an Information Disclosure
Statement;
(C) Whether the specification’s background description
adequately describes the background of the disclosed subject matter;
(D) Whether related documents, written by an inventor or an
employee of the assignee, which were not submitted, are found during the
search or described in the application file;
(E) Whether non-patent literature is referred to in the
disclosure, but a copy has not been supplied; and
(F) Whether the specification’s background of the invention
describes information as being known or conventional, which may be
considered as an admission of prior art, but such information is unfamiliar
to examiner and cannot be found within the application file or from the
examiner’s search, and further details of the information would be relevant
to the question of patentability.
II
upplied; and
(F) Whether the specification’s background of the invention
describes information as being known or conventional, which may be
considered as an admission of prior art, but such information is unfamiliar
to examiner and cannot be found within the application file or from the
examiner’s search, and further details of the information would be relevant
to the question of patentability.
II.
WITH THE FIRST ACTION ON THE MERITS
A requirement for information may be combined with a first action
on the merits that includes at least one rejection, if, for example, either the
application file or the lack of relevant prior art found in the examiner’s search
justifies asking the applicant if he or she has information that would be relevant
to the patentability determination.
It is not appropriate to make a requirement for information based
on a lack of relevant prior art with a first action on the merits allowance or
Ex parte Quayle
action.
III.
AFTER THE FIRST ACTION ON THE MERITS
A requirement for information made after the first action on the
merits may be appropriate when the application file justifies asking the applicant
if he or she has information that would be relevant to the patentability
determination. It is rarely appropriate to require information because of a lack
of relevant prior art after the first action on the merits.
A requirement for information is not proper when no further action
would be taken by the examiner. The reasonable necessity criteria for a
requirement for information implies further action by the examiner. This means
that actions in which requirements for information necessary for examination are
made should generally be a non-final action because the applicant’s reply must be
considered and applied as appropriate.
Under limited circumstances, requirements under
37 CFR 1.105
may be made in an application that is issued or abandoned. Such a requirement
would normally be made only during part of some ongoing proceeding involving the
issued patent or abandoned application
for examination are
made should generally be a non-final action because the applicant’s reply must be
considered and applied as appropriate.
Under limited circumstances, requirements under
37 CFR 1.105
may be made in an application that is issued or abandoned. Such a requirement
would normally be made only during part of some ongoing proceeding involving the
issued patent or abandoned application. Examples of proceedings when an examiner
or other Office employee would issue such a request in an abandoned application
include proceedings to revive the abandoned application. Examples of proceedings
when an examiner or other Office employee would issue such a request in a patent
include proceedings to change inventorship and reexamination proceedings.

## Nearby sections

- [MPEP § 701 Statutory Authority for Examination](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S701.md)
- [MPEP § 702 Requisites of the Application](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S702.md)
- [MPEP § 702.01 Obviously Informal Cases](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S702.01.md)
- [MPEP § 703 [Reserved]](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S703.md)
- [MPEP § 704.01 Search](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.01.md)
- [MPEP § 704.10 Requirements for Information](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.10.md)
- [MPEP § 704.11 What Information May Be Required](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.11.md)
- [MPEP § 704.11(a) Examples of Information Reasonably Required](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.11(a).md)
- [MPEP § 704.11(b) When May a Requirement for Information Be Made](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.11(b).md)
- [MPEP § 704.12 Replies to a Requirement for Information](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.12.md)
- [MPEP § 704.12(a) Relationship of Requirement for Information to Duty of Disclosure](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.12(a).md)
- [MPEP § 704.12(b) What Constitutes a Complete Reply](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.12(b).md)
- [MPEP § 704.12(c) Treatment of an Incomplete Reply](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.12(c).md)
- [MPEP § 704.13 Time Periods for Reply](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.13.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/MPEP_S704.11(b). Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.
