Which statement is accurate regarding filing an affidavit in a derivation?

Filing an affidavit in a derivation proceeding can serve as a valuable tool for overcoming potential rejections based on prior filings. A derivation proceeding is utilized to resolve disputes regarding who was the first inventor of a claimed invention, specifically when one party claims that another party derived the invention from them without authorization. The affidavit can provide evidence supporting one's claim of prior invention or disclose details about the invention that the applicant believes were not independently developed by the other party. This can be crucial in demonstrating the originality of the invention and establishing that the applicant has the rightful claim to it.

In the context of the options, saying that it can help overcome rejections based on prior filings indicates an understanding of how affidavits serve as supportive evidence in legal claims regarding patent rights and inventor recognition. Consequently, this creates an opportunity for the affiant to reinforce their case and counter the arguments or evidence presented by the opposition.

The necessity of filing an affidavit with every application is incorrect, as affidavits are not required unless there is an ongoing derivation dispute. Filing an affidavit must also align with specific timelines set by the rules associated with derivation proceedings, making the idea that it must be filed immediately not entirely accurate. As for the fourth option, while affidav