When new matter is added to the claims of a patent application, what is the likely consequence?

Adding new matter to the claims of a patent application presents specific challenges under the patent law outlined in 35 U.S.C. 112(a), which mandates that a patent application must have a written description that supports the claims. When new matter is introduced that was not included in the initial filing, it raises concerns regarding the adequacy of the initial disclosure. This is because the original specifications must fully support the claims without introducing additional aspects that were not originally described.

As a result, if the claims contain new matter that does not comply with this foundational requirement, the likely outcome is that those claims will be rejected. This rejection is based on the principle that a patent cannot be broadened through amendments to include information that was not part of the original submission. The law is designed to prevent applicants from changing their invention's scope once the application has been filed, ensuring the public has a fair understanding of what is protected by the patent.

In contrast, the other options do not accurately reflect the consequences of adding new matter. Claims being accepted as is would contradict the requirements of the law. Abandonment of the application is not an inevitable outcome of simply adding new matter, especially if the applicant can respond properly. Ignoring the claims by the examiner is also unlikely