Patent bar Restriction and double patenting question: reply to a requirement to restrict between a catalyst and a process of using

Answer: E. The election is treated as made without traverse, so the right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144 has been lost

Answer: The election is treated as made without traverse, so the right to petition under 37 CFR 1.144 has been lost. A traverse must give a written statement of reasons that distinctly and specifically points out the supposed errors; a mere statement of 'with traverse' or a failure to give reasons is treated as an election without traverse (MPEP 818.01, 818.01(a)). A petition under 1.144 will not be considered if reconsideration of the requirement was not requested, so the right to petition is lost (MPEP 818.01(c)). Why not the others: - Words 'with traverse': the label alone is not a traverse. - Any time before issue: even a preserved petition must be filed no later than the notice of appeal. - Petition independent of reconsideration: 1.144 says a petition will not be considered unless reconsideration was requested. - No one-month limit applies; a preserved petition may be deferred until after final action on the elected claims, but not past the notice of appeal. Rule: Only a traverse that specifically points out errors preserves the right to petition under 1.144. Source: MPEP § 818.01, § 818.01(a), § 818.01(c) (9th ed., Rev. 01.2024); 37 CFR 1.143, 1.144; as at Oct 2026