Backward citation

Cross-referenced

Forward citation

A later patent that cites a given patent as prior art. Forward citations accumulate over time and are the standard quick measure of a patent's influence: a patent cited by hundreds of subsequent filings likely describes foundational technology, while one nobody cites probably had little impact. Investors and analysts count forward citations to gauge which patents actually shaped a field. The opposite of a backward citation.

Cross-referenced

Examiner

A USPTO employee trained in a specific technical field who reviews patent applications for compliance with patent law. Examiners search prior art, write office actions rejecting or allowing claims, and conduct interviews with applicants or their attorneys. The examiner assigned to your application has significant discretion in how they interpret your claims and apply prior art.

Cross-referenced

Patent

A government-granted right that gives an inventor the exclusive right to prevent others from making, using, selling, or importing a patented invention within the country that granted the patent, for a limited time. A patent does not give the owner the right to practice the invention — only the right to exclude others. The US issues three types: utility, design, and plant patents.

Best mode

A requirement that, at filing, the inventor disclose the best way they knew to carry out the invention. Since the America Invents Act, failing to disclose the best mode can no longer be used to invalidate a patent in litigation, but it remains a filing requirement at the USPTO.

Basis for rejection

The specific legal grounds a patent examiner cites when refusing to allow a claim. Common bases include lack of novelty (35 USC § 102), obviousness (35 USC § 103), failure to fully describe the invention (35 USC § 112), and unpatentable subject matter (35 USC § 101). An office action will state the basis for each rejection, and applicants must address each one in their response.

Broadest reasonable interpretation

A standard the USPTO uses during examination to interpret claim language. Examiners give claim terms the broadest meaning a person skilled in the art would reasonably understand from the specification — not the narrowest. This is intentional: if a claim is too broad it should fail during examination, not slip through and later cause harm. Applicants can argue against an overly broad interpretation by pointing to the specification or adding clarifying language.