As logn as the Initial Reissue Application is Filed within Two Years, Subsequent Broadening Continuation Reissue Applications can be filed Any Time

In re Staats, [2010-1443] (March 5, 2012) [DYK, O'Malley, Reyna] The Federal Circuit reversed and remanded the BPAI's rejection of claims as being improperly broadened by a reissue filed more than two years after issuance.
DISCUSSION: Staats filed a broadening reissue application within two years from the issuance of the patent relating to the the first preferred embodiment of the invention. While the reissue application was pending, but more than two years from the issuance of the patent, Staats filed a second broadening reissue application relating to the first preferred embodiment. While the second reissue patent application was pending, well almost seven years after the issuance of the patent, Staats filed a third broadening reissue application, and eventually included claims directed to a second embodiment. These were rejected by the Examiner as untimely because they were not related to the subject matter of the original broadening reissue application, and the BPAI affirmed. The Federal Circuit reversed, finding In re Doll, 419 F.2d 925 (C.C.P.A. 1970), which held that the Section 251 time limit applies only to the filing of the first broadening reissue application. The Federal Circuit rejected the PTO 's attempt to distinguish Doll because the subject matter of the later filed broadening reissue application was not related to original reissue application. The Federal Circuit said that In re Doll made no such distinction, and in any event a different approach would be "unmanageable".