What standards are similar to lawsuits in the context of MPEP?

Interference proceedings are indeed similar to lawsuits as they involve a formal dispute resolution process concerning the rights to a patent. In these proceedings, competing parties (typically inventors or patent holders) assert their claims to the same invention or overlapping subject matter. This is analogous to how lawsuits resolve conflicts between litigants regarding rights, ownership, or claims to certain property or inventions.

During an interference, parties present their evidence, often including documentation and expert testimony, to an administrative body (the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, or PTAB) to determine who was the first to invent or to establish the priority of invention. This adversarial environment bears resemblance to a courtroom litigation setting, where each side attempts to prove their case against the other.

In contrast, utility patent applications focus on the examination of new inventions and do not involve conflicting claims between inventors; reexamination procedures allow third parties to challenge the validity of an already issued patent without the same level of adversarial engagement as in an interference; and citation of prior art is an informational step in the patent examination process where relevant prior patents or literature are submitted without the formal dispute characteristic of legal proceedings.