706.07(f) Time for Reply to Final Rejection
MPEP 706.07(f)規範了回覆最終審查意見（Final Office Action）的時機，包括：
(A)每個最終審查意見（FOA）都規定3個月回覆的短期法定期限（shortened statutory period, SSP），其中建議申請人如果在FOA發出之後兩個月內（遇假日順延）提出回覆（reply），此三個月的短期法定期限則會於FOA發出後3個月或是發出諮詢意見（Advisory Action, AA）的日期（mailing date）過期（以兩者較晚的期限為主），故此未經延期的期限會有所變動，但針對FOA的回覆期限總共（加上額外的延期）不能超過FOA發出後的六個月。
[原文](A) All final rejections setting a 3-month shortened statutory period (SSP) for reply should contain one of form paragraphs 7.39, 7.40, 7.40.01, 7.40.02, 7.41, 7.41.03, 7.42.03, 7.42.031, or 7.42.09 advising applicant that if the reply is filed within 2 months of the date of the final Office action, the shortened statutory period will expire at 3 months from the date of the final rejection or on the date the advisory action is mailed, whichever is later. Thus, a variable reply period will be established. If the last day of "2 months of the date of the final Office action" falls on Saturday, Sunday, or a Federal holiday within the District of Columbia, and a reply is filed on the next succeeding day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or a Federal holiday, pursuant to 37 CFR 1.7(a), the reply is deemed to have been filed within the 2 months period and the shortened statutory period will expire at 3 months from the date of the final rejection or on the mailing date of the advisory action, whichever is later (see MPEP §710.05). In no event can the statutory period for reply expire later than 6 months from the mailing date of the final rejection.
(B)上述根據申請人發出第一次回覆的時間所做出可變動的期限並不適用於短期法定期限（SSP）少於3個月的程序，如期限僅1個月的再領證程序（reissue）或是再審查程序（reexamination）。
[原文](B) This procedure of setting a variable reply period in the final rejection dependent on when applicant files a first reply to a final Office action does not apply to situations where a SSP less than 3 months is set, e.g., reissue litigation applications (1-month SSP) or any reexamination proceeding.
I. ADVISORY ACTIONSI. 此段規範諮詢意見（Advisory Actions）
(C)當申請人在FOA之後兩個月內提出一個完整的回覆（答辯）時，即設定前段(A)所描述的可變動的回覆期限，審查委員必須判斷：
(1)申請案為可核准的狀態；
(2)申請案是除了有審查委員可自行修正的小問題（如拼錯字、用錯動詞、用錯代名詞、錯誤標號等）之外可核准
(3)申請案不可核准，此時，諮詢意見中需通知申請人短期法定期限到期日（FOA發出後三個月內或是AA發出的時間，其中較晚的）
[原文](C) Where the final Office action sets a variable reply period as set forth in paragraph (A) above AND applicant files a complete first reply to the final Office action within 2 months of the date of the final Office action, the examiner must determine if the reply:
(1) places the application in condition for allowance - then the application should be processed as an allowance and no extension fees are due;
(2) places the application in condition for allowance except for matters of form which the examiner can change without authorization from applicant, MPEP § 1302.04 - then the application should be amended as required and processed as an allowance and no extension fees are due; or
(3) does not place the application in condition for allowance - then the advisory action should inform applicant that the SSP for reply expires 3 months from the date of the final rejection or as of the mailing date of the advisory action, whichever is later, by checking box 1.b) at the top portion of the Advisory Action form, PTOL-303.
(D)若申請人並未於FOA發出後兩個月內提出完整的答覆，則無上述短期法定期限的問題
[原文](D) Where the final Office action sets a variable reply period as set forth in paragraph (A) above, and applicant does NOT file a complete first reply to the final Office action within 2 months, examiners should check box 1.a) at the top portion of the Advisory Action form, PTOL-303.
(E)當接到諮詢意見，申請人接下來的作業時間除了有FOA發出後3個月或是AA發出日期（較晚的那個）的限制，仍應於FOA發出後6個月的期限回覆，否則就遭撤銷。
[原文](E) When box 1.b) at the top portion of the Advisory Action form, PTOL-303 is checked, the time for applicant to take further action (including the calculation of extension fees under 37 CFR 1.136(a)) begins to run 3 months from the date of the final rejection, or from the date of the advisory action, whichever is later. Extension fees cannot be prorated for portions of a month. In no event can the statutory period for reply expire later than 6 months from the date of the final rejection.
此段列舉一例：
如果申請人於FOA發出後兩個月內提出完整的回覆內容（答辯），審查委員應FOA發出後三個月內發出諮詢意見，此時短期法定期限則會於FOA發出後3個月到期，仍可有另外3個月的延期。但是，若申請人於FOA發出後兩個月內提出回覆，但是審查委員並未於三個月內發出諮詢意見，則短期法定期限（此例已經超過三個月）改變為諮詢意見發出日期到期，延期費也是從AA發出日期開始計算。
以下為諮詢意見通知的表格：
II. EXAMINER'S AMENDMENTSII. 此段規範審查委員於接到FOA回覆的修正：
(F)當於FOA發出後兩個月內及時提出一個完整的回覆時，若經審查委員修正而可核准，雖可能已超出FOA發出後三個月之後，但仍不會產生延期費用，但審查委員自行修正時間仍不能超過FOA發出後6個月，否則會被撤銷
[原文](F) Where a complete first reply to a final Office action has been filed within2 months of the final Office action, an examiner's amendment to place theapplication in condition for allowance may be made without the payment of extension fees even if the examiner's amendment is made more than 3 months from the date of the final Office action. Note that an examiner's amendment may not be made more than 6 months from the date of the final Office action, as the application would be abandoned at that point by operation of law.
(G)當申請人於FOA發出後兩個月內提出回覆，申請人可於FOA發出後3個月內或是經請求延期授權給審查委員進行修正，然而此時審查委員的修正僅能針對除了一些文法、格式錯誤修正而可核准的情況下進行修正
[原文](G) Where a complete first reply to a final Office action has not been filed within 2 months of the final Office action, applicant's authorization to make an amendment to place the application in condition for allowance must be made either within the 3 month shortened statutory period or within an extended period for reply that has been petitioned and paid for by applicant pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a). However, an examiner's amendment correcting only formal matters which are identified for the first time after a reply is made to a final Office action would not require any extension fee, since the reply to the final Office action put the application in condition for allowance except for the correction of formal matters, the correction of which had not yet been required by the examiner.
(H)申請人可提出請求（petition）與延期費，授權給審查委員進行可核准的修正，但不能接受口頭指導完成信用卡付費
其他注意事項：
1.應於法定期限內對FOA做出回覆
2.在短期法定期限之外可請求面詢，不會有多的費用
3.針對格式上修正而可核准的案子不應有延期費用
4.FOA後，爭議程序仍可被再啟動，如提出RCE等
資料來源：USPTO
Ron
最高法院進行審理時，認為此技術與先前技術僅差於更新警報範圍的演算方式，即使在權利範圍中，具有一些除了數學演算以外的步驟，但仍無法獲准專利。法院明確拒絕了利用所謂「post-solution activity」能將不可專利的東西轉換成可專利的程序，法院進一步說明，此技術「整體來說」不可專利並非是因為它包括了數學演算的元件，而是此演算法已經揭露於先前技術中，利用已經揭露的技術產生其他功效無法專利。
