Test takers report that MPEP Chapter 1800, PCT, is tested heavily on the Prometric Patent Bar Exam. Experiencing 3-4 questions on this topic is common and some test takers report as many as 10-15 questions (most likely some are beta questions).
A test taker reported a question with obscure facts, like how long you have to correct a PCT application with no address after you are invited to correct the problem. Answer – This information is from PCT Rule 20.6 (under the Patent Cooperation Treaty section at the end of the MPEP). 20.6 Invitation to Correct … (b) The receiving Office shall promptly mail the invitation to the applicant and shall fix a time limit, reasonable under the circumstances of the case, for filing the correction. The time limit shall not be less than 10 days, and shall not exceed one month, from the date of the invitation. If such time limit expires after the expiration of one year from the filing date of any application whose priority is claimed, the receiving Office may call this circumstance to the attention of the applicant.
This rule is also referenced in MPEP 1810 under the heading: THE “INTERNATIONAL FILING DATE”. The International Application (PCT) filing date accorded the application is the date of compliance with the invitation to correct. It should be noted that, based on my reading of this section, an applicant can apparently lose his/her rights to priority if the deficiency in the IA is not cleared up within 12 months from the date of priority, if any, claimed in the International Application–EVEN IF the time to respond to the invitation to correct has not expired.
A test taker reported a question where the applicant submits three different amendments to the UPSTO as the Receiving Office of a PCT application.
a) Correcting a misspelled word “ccar”
b) Adding a drawing that was accidentally left out but is in earlier filed provisional or non-provisional application benefit of which is claimed.
c) Adding a page to explain in the specification something clearly shown on a drawing.
Question is what will the USPTO do? Answer – The question targets MPEP 1836 – rectification of obvious errors.
Obvious errors in the international application or other papers submitted by the applicant may generally be rectified under PCT Rule 91, if the rectification is authorized, as required, within the applicable time limit. […] The omission of entire sheets of the description cannot be rectified, even if resulting from inattention at the stage of copying or assembling sheets. Applicants often attempt to rely upon the priority application to establish a basis for obvious error. The priority document (application) cannot be used to support obvious error corrections. The rectification is obvious only in the sense that anyone would immediately realize that nothing else could have been intended than what is offered as rectification.
Examples of obvious errors that are rectifiable include linguistic errors, spelling errors and grammatical errors so long as the meaning of the disclosure does not change upon entry of the rectification. Changes to chemical or mathematical formulas would not generally be rectifiable unless they would be common knowledge to anyone.< A missing chemical formula or missing line of text would not be considered >to be an< obvious error subject to rectification. **