<?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) Omitted Items (10.02.34a)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/</link>
	<description>Patent Bar Review and Study Guide</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 03:15:12 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: qwacker</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-18591</link>
		<dc:creator>qwacker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 03:28:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-18591</guid>
		<description>Indeed, why not file a complete nonprovisional and claim priority to the provisional. The missing page will have the later filing date, but the rest of the app will claim to the provisional&#039;s filing date. I can&#039;t think of a need to correct a provisional with a missing page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Indeed, why not file a complete nonprovisional and claim priority to the provisional. The missing page will have the later filing date, but the rest of the app will claim to the provisional&#8217;s filing date. I can&#8217;t think of a need to correct a provisional with a missing page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: qwacker</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-18590</link>
		<dc:creator>qwacker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2011 03:26:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-18590</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s an important concept if you&#039;re looking at a reference dated between the original filing and the date of submission of the omitted page.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s an important concept if you&#8217;re looking at a reference dated between the original filing and the date of submission of the omitted page.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SoBe</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-17380</link>
		<dc:creator>SoBe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 22:08:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-17380</guid>
		<description>601.01(d)Application Filed Without AllPages of Specification
I.APPLICATION ENTITLED TO FILING DATE
(C) (2)
...&quot;Likewise, in view of the relatively low filing fee for provisional applications, and the USPTO’s desire to minimize the processing of provisional applications, the USPTO will not grant petitions under 37 CFR 1.182 to accept omitted page(s) and accord an application filing date as of the date of such submission in provisional applications. The applicant should simply file a new completed provisional application.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>601.01(d)Application Filed Without AllPages of Specification<br />
I.APPLICATION ENTITLED TO FILING DATE<br />
(C) (2)<br />
&#8230;&#8221;Likewise, in view of the relatively low filing fee for provisional applications, and the USPTO’s desire to minimize the processing of provisional applications, the USPTO will not grant petitions under 37 CFR 1.182 to accept omitted page(s) and accord an application filing date as of the date of such submission in provisional applications. The applicant should simply file a new completed provisional application.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: fengyuwuzu</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-17359</link>
		<dc:creator>fengyuwuzu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Oct 2011 18:47:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-17359</guid>
		<description>about your note: where is MPEP says that &quot;you MUST make a new provisional application&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>about your note: where is MPEP says that &#8220;you MUST make a new provisional application&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: patenttips</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-8823</link>
		<dc:creator>patenttips</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 23:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-8823</guid>
		<description>B doesn&#039;t seem to be the best choice.  A is correct and E is good but not within the time period.

**Note, this is a non-provisional, there is another question that asks about missing drawing in a provisional.  You can not file petition in a provisional to get an earlier date, instead, you MUST make a new provisional application.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>B doesn&#8217;t seem to be the best choice.  A is correct and E is good but not within the time period.</p>
<p>**Note, this is a non-provisional, there is another question that asks about missing drawing in a provisional.  You can not file petition in a provisional to get an earlier date, instead, you MUST make a new provisional application.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeff</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-1843</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 04:14:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-1843</guid>
		<description>This has to be one of the most nit-picky questions in the old exams if the answer hinges on the inclusion of &quot;must&quot; in the answer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This has to be one of the most nit-picky questions in the old exams if the answer hinges on the inclusion of &#8220;must&#8221; in the answer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-1746</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Apr 2010 17:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-1746</guid>
		<description>I struggled with this same question.   I think B wrong because it does not further specify &quot;An applicant desiring to submit the omitted page(s) in a nonprovisional application and accept the date of such submission as the application filing date must, within 2 months from the date of the &quot;Notice of Omitted Item(s),&quot; file any omitted page(s) with an oath or declaration in compliance with 37 CFR  1.63 and 37 CFR  1.64 referring to such page(s) and a petition under 37 CFR  1.182 with the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR  1.17(f)&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I struggled with this same question.   I think B wrong because it does not further specify &#8220;An applicant desiring to submit the omitted page(s) in a nonprovisional application and accept the date of such submission as the application filing date must, within 2 months from the date of the &#8220;Notice of Omitted Item(s),&#8221; file any omitted page(s) with an oath or declaration in compliance with 37 CFR  1.63 and 37 CFR  1.64 referring to such page(s) and a petition under 37 CFR  1.182 with the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR  1.17(f)&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DY</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-1510</link>
		<dc:creator>DY</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:35:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-1510</guid>
		<description>Jane &quot;must&quot; promptly submit the omitted page and accept an application filing date as of the date of submission of the omitted page.

As 601.01(d) indicates an option between A) or B), it makes &quot;must&quot; a wrong choice.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jane &#8220;must&#8221; promptly submit the omitted page and accept an application filing date as of the date of submission of the omitted page.</p>
<p>As 601.01(d) indicates an option between A) or B), it makes &#8220;must&#8221; a wrong choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: S</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-1509</link>
		<dc:creator>S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 18:15:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-1509</guid>
		<description>I know that A is correct but I think B should also be the correct answer because according to 601.01(d),

&quot;The mailing of a &quot;Notice of Omitted Items&quot; will permit the applicant to either:
A) Promptly establish prior receipt in the PTO of the  page(s) at issue

or

B) Promptly submit the omitted page(s) in a NPA and accept the date of such submission as the application filing date.

I think the B choice of the above choices fulfills the second choice.
What am I missing here?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know that A is correct but I think B should also be the correct answer because according to 601.01(d),</p>
<p>&#8220;The mailing of a &#8220;Notice of Omitted Items&#8221; will permit the applicant to either:<br />
A) Promptly establish prior receipt in the PTO of the  page(s) at issue</p>
<p>or</p>
<p>B) Promptly submit the omitted page(s) in a NPA and accept the date of such submission as the application filing date.</p>
<p>I think the B choice of the above choices fulfills the second choice.<br />
What am I missing here?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: triedandtested</title>
		<link>http://mypatentbar.com/2009/04/28/q-omitted-items-100234a/#comment-1508</link>
		<dc:creator>triedandtested</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:54:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mypatentbar.com/?p=876#comment-1508</guid>
		<description>E is wrong because the 3 month time is 2 late (You have to respond within 2 months for notice of omitted items)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>E is wrong because the 3 month time is 2 late (You have to respond within 2 months for notice of omitted items)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

