<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Q) 35 USC 102(e) (4.02.11a)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/</link>
	<description>Patent Bar Review and Study Guide</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 00:33:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Keener</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-39656</link>
		<dc:creator>Keener</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:26:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-39656</guid>
		<description>Oh Thank you, thank you, thank you, Alan.
This question is in Longacre&#039;s study guide published in 2010 and it has been bothering me for the past 3 months.  I KNEW it had to be wrong, but couldn&#039;t pin down why.
Thank you for clearing this up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh Thank you, thank you, thank you, Alan.<br />
This question is in Longacre&#8217;s study guide published in 2010 and it has been bothering me for the past 3 months.  I KNEW it had to be wrong, but couldn&#8217;t pin down why.<br />
Thank you for clearing this up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sol</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37910</link>
		<dc:creator>Sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 01:43:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37910</guid>
		<description>I hate PCT rules, national stage date can on or BEFORE 30 months.

Thus, in the absence of an express request for early processing of an international application under 35 U.S.C. 371(f) and compliance with the conditions provided therein, the U.S. national stage will commence upon expiration of 30 months from the priority date of the international application. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 371(f), the national stage may commence earlier than 30 months from the priority date, provided applicant makes an express request for early processing and has complied with the applicable requirements under 35 U.S.C. 371(c).&lt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate PCT rules, national stage date can on or BEFORE 30 months.</p>
<p>Thus, in the absence of an express request for early processing of an international application under 35 U.S.C. 371(f) and compliance with the conditions provided therein, the U.S. national stage will commence upon expiration of 30 months from the priority date of the international application. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. 371(f), the national stage may commence earlier than 30 months from the priority date, provided applicant makes an express request for early processing and has complied with the applicable requirements under 35 U.S.C. 371(c).&lt;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sol</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37909</link>
		<dc:creator>Sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 01:40:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37909</guid>
		<description>earliest possible prior art date for the December 4, 2001 US patent is?
102(a) date is December 4, 2001
102(e) is the last of 371c(1), c(2), c(4), which must be on or slightly after the nationa stage entry date of August 28, 1998.

I correct myself for one point
 the last of 371c(1), c(2), c(4) submission date is not necessarily the entry date. Entry date can be earlier than the last submission date of c1, c2, c4 because translation in c2 and oath/dec of c4 can be submitted later. As long as fee of c1 and a copy in c2 are submitted before 30 month, national stage is successfull entered and started on the 30 month date.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>earliest possible prior art date for the December 4, 2001 US patent is?<br />
102(a) date is December 4, 2001<br />
102(e) is the last of 371c(1), c(2), c(4), which must be on or slightly after the nationa stage entry date of August 28, 1998.</p>
<p>I correct myself for one point<br />
 the last of 371c(1), c(2), c(4) submission date is not necessarily the entry date. Entry date can be earlier than the last submission date of c1, c2, c4 because translation in c2 and oath/dec of c4 can be submitted later. As long as fee of c1 and a copy in c2 are submitted before 30 month, national stage is successfull entered and started on the 30 month date.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sol</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37908</link>
		<dc:creator>Sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2012 01:28:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37908</guid>
		<description>Thank you. I finally saw your recommendation here. This website is good, but it is really inconvenient to track down comments and questions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you. I finally saw your recommendation here. This website is good, but it is really inconvenient to track down comments and questions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miranda</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37831</link>
		<dc:creator>Miranda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 02:32:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37831</guid>
		<description>trust me, you don&#039;t need a simulator. i was tempted to buy catprep(?-can&#039;t remember) but am glad i didn&#039;t. i thought the demo on the prometric site was plenty sufficient for my overall mental prep.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>trust me, you don&#8217;t need a simulator. i was tempted to buy catprep(?-can&#8217;t remember) but am glad i didn&#8217;t. i thought the demo on the prometric site was plenty sufficient for my overall mental prep.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sol</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37823</link>
		<dc:creator>Sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2012 00:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37823</guid>
		<description>Just follow those two flow charts.

Essence of new 102(e) is that some IA (11/29/00, des US pub Eng) can viewed as US pat app.Then just think it as a US pat app and do the analysis.

Be careful with the questions, 102(e) date of what?
of IA application? (never)
of IA publication? (yes if 11/29/00, des US pub Eng; no if not)
of again publication of IA in US after entering national stage?(yes if 11/29/00, des US pub Eng; no if not)
of patent from an IA that entered national stage? (the complicated one before 11/29/00, it is the calculated 102(e) date, i.e. the nation stage entry date. i.e. the last of c(1), c(2), c(4) submited. on or after 11/29/00 then follow yes if 11/29/00, des US pub Eng; no if not.

only when 11/29/00, des US pub Eng, the IA can be viewed as a regular app filed in US, then it can be used as the bridge to connect earlier US app whose benifit was claimed in IA, TO the pat iussed from IA or any later US app claiming benift of the IA</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just follow those two flow charts.</p>
<p>Essence of new 102(e) is that some IA (11/29/00, des US pub Eng) can viewed as US pat app.Then just think it as a US pat app and do the analysis.</p>
<p>Be careful with the questions, 102(e) date of what?<br />
of IA application? (never)<br />
of IA publication? (yes if 11/29/00, des US pub Eng; no if not)<br />
of again publication of IA in US after entering national stage?(yes if 11/29/00, des US pub Eng; no if not)<br />
of patent from an IA that entered national stage? (the complicated one before 11/29/00, it is the calculated 102(e) date, i.e. the nation stage entry date. i.e. the last of c(1), c(2), c(4) submited. on or after 11/29/00 then follow yes if 11/29/00, des US pub Eng; no if not.</p>
<p>only when 11/29/00, des US pub Eng, the IA can be viewed as a regular app filed in US, then it can be used as the bridge to connect earlier US app whose benifit was claimed in IA, TO the pat iussed from IA or any later US app claiming benift of the IA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RT</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37818</link>
		<dc:creator>RT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Apr 2012 22:01:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37818</guid>
		<description>Is it just me or are these 102(e) questions the most confusing questions on the tests?

Are there any good recent discussions of the 102(e) questions?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Is it just me or are these 102(e) questions the most confusing questions on the tests?</p>
<p>Are there any good recent discussions of the 102(e) questions?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Miranda</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-37438</link>
		<dc:creator>Miranda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2012 01:02:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-37438</guid>
		<description>Not sure where that 4th requirement came from. It is obviously wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not sure where that 4th requirement came from. It is obviously wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sol</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-36672</link>
		<dc:creator>Sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 23:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-36672</guid>
		<description>I could not find support for this requirement &quot;4) the application entered the US national stage.&quot;

A WIPO publication satisify 1, 2, 3 but before entering US national stage has NO 102(e) date?

I don&#039;t agree.  But any input from others?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I could not find support for this requirement &#8220;4) the application entered the US national stage.&#8221;</p>
<p>A WIPO publication satisify 1, 2, 3 but before entering US national stage has NO 102(e) date?</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t agree.  But any input from others?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sol</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2008/09/04/q-35-usc-102e-40211a/#comment-36660</link>
		<dc:creator>Sol</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2012 21:33:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://patentbar.wordpress.com/?p=812#comment-36660</guid>
		<description>The way of reasoning is corrent but the anser is wrong

Be careful with the call of the question:

earliest possible prior art date for the June 7th U.S. published application is its publication date E

earliest possible prior art date for theinternational application  published in English on August 28, 1997.is its publication date C</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The way of reasoning is corrent but the anser is wrong</p>
<p>Be careful with the call of the question:</p>
<p>earliest possible prior art date for the June 7th U.S. published application is its publication date E</p>
<p>earliest possible prior art date for theinternational application  published in English on August 28, 1997.is its publication date C</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

