Q) Broom Handle (MPEP 2100)

by patentbar on October 27, 2007 · 25 comments

in Exam Questions

I think the two part broom handle question to which you are referring might be the question about the application containing some ridiculous number of claims, like I think 900 or so. It has to do with multiplicity. I haven’t seen it on an exam, but I have seen it referred to on the boards. I think the correct answer has to do with the examiner calling the practitioner and asking for the claims to be reduced. There is also another part to the correct response but I cannot recall it at this time. Just read the section on multiplicity. I don’t think it is too long.

Multiplicity

Multiplicity question – applicant has one utility claim and more than 900 claims covering small ornamental differences. Answer is that the examiner should call the applicant and have him select a few claims for examination.

M.P.E.P. Section 2173.05(n), Specific Topics Related to Issues Under 35 U.S.C.
If a rejection on multiplicity is in order the examiner should make a telephone call explaining that the claims are unduly multiplied and will be rejected on that ground. Note MPEP Section 408. The examiner should request selection of a specified number of claims for purposes of examination.
1 BulldozerNo Gravatar March 30, 2009 at 11:40 pm

It’s down between prolix and multiplicity. The question pretty much answers it for you that there is confusion by the examiner and that he wants the applicant to choose claims for prosecution– which is right on the money with multiplicity.

2 samboNo Gravatar September 12, 2009 at 10:35 am

Had this question yesterday. If claim amount is unreasonable

1. Examiner should make a phone call explaining that the claims are unduly, and request selection of a specified number….VERBATIM from MPEP

be careful as there is a similar answer with the telephone element missing. It just says, make a rejection and request a specified number

3 Emily M.No Gravatar February 13, 2010 at 9:41 pm

Got this today – chose telephone answer.

4 PeterNo Gravatar April 4, 2010 at 10:21 pm

Also see 2173.05(n) Multiplicity
If an undue multiplicity rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, is appropriate, the examiner should contact applicant by telephone explaining that the claims are unduly multiplied and will be rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph. Note MPEP ยง 408. The examiner should also request that applicant select a specified number of claims for purpose of examination.

5 SallyNo Gravatar April 5, 2010 at 5:13 pm

Thank you, Peter. I see from looking this up in the MPEP that this is correct. Hope I get this question.
Sally

6 SNo Gravatar June 5, 2010 at 6:36 am

I got this yesterday. Call the examiner.

7 RandyNo Gravatar August 19, 2010 at 12:49 pm

Examiner should call the applicant.

8 StuffNo Gravatar October 12, 2010 at 10:39 pm

It’s in the examiner’s best interest to use the local switchboard to place a telephone call, applicant being recipient of said telephone call.

9 AnneNo Gravatar January 19, 2011 at 4:01 pm

Got this one today.

10 BeckerNo Gravatar May 17, 2011 at 3:15 pm

I got this question 5/16/2011.

11 SarahNo Gravatar May 18, 2011 at 4:07 pm

Got this question today 5/18/11.

12 giaps2No Gravatar July 26, 2011 at 8:08 pm

Saw this question or a variant on 07/25/11.

13 BobNo Gravatar August 3, 2011 at 2:02 am

Got this on 8/2/11

14 DanielNo Gravatar August 3, 2011 at 11:11 am

Saw this one exactly on 7/29/2011

15 TJLNo Gravatar August 18, 2011 at 11:42 pm

Got this 8/18.

16 ntlNo Gravatar September 7, 2011 at 8:46 am

Got this one on 09/06/11.

17 NickNo Gravatar September 7, 2011 at 5:00 pm

Got this on 9/7/11.

18 RemandedNo Gravatar September 18, 2011 at 8:54 pm

Got this one today, 18 September 2011.

19 JamecamNo Gravatar October 30, 2011 at 10:44 pm

I got this question on 10/29/2011.

The correct answer was that the examiner should call the practitioner by phone and ask him to select a few claims for prosecution. Then, in the first office action, the examiner should make the multiplicity rejection for the unelected claims if the practitioner agrees that claims are multiplicative.

20 SolNo Gravatar April 6, 2012 at 5:20 pm

Just a note, this is wrong “if the practitioner agrees that claims are multiplicative”. There is no requirement of admission, i.e, the practioner is required to agree. The practionner can agree/disagree, does not matter, totally unrelevant. The point is to select.

Call–Select–Examine the selected claims—Next OA, make the mutiplicity rejection and any other rejection/objections as necessary–usual proceduare

or

Call–NO Select—Next OA, make the mutiplicity rejection and any other rejection/objections as necessary–Select–Examine the selected claims—Next OA, still maintain the mutiplicity rejection and any other rejection/objections as necessary–usual procedure

21 KillianRedNo Gravatar March 17, 2012 at 5:48 pm

Got this on 3/17/12

22 GDBNo Gravatar April 19, 2012 at 7:02 pm

Got this 19/04/12

23 KeenerNo Gravatar May 18, 2012 at 4:16 pm

Can anyone who’s had this question spell out in more detail? There are bits and pieces, but without seeing the question at the exam, I don’t think I could recreate it based on the posts.
Thanks

24 fluidNo Gravatar September 23, 2012 at 8:59 am

I had it 9/22/2012.

25 Wishful ThinkingNo Gravatar September 25, 2012 at 3:39 pm

Had this on 9/24/12.

Previous post:

Next post: