Study Guide

735 comments

PART 1 – Introduction
1) Prometric Patent Bar Exam

PART 2 – MPEP 2100
2) 35 USC 101
3) 35 USC 102 (a),(b),(c),(d),(e),(f) and (g)
4) 35 USC 103
5) 35 USC 112 (1st, 2nd and 6th paragraphs)
6) Patentable Subject Matter (MPEP 2100)

PART 3 – Other Patents
7) Design Patents (MPEP 1500)
8) Plant Patents (MPEP 1600)
9) Biotechnology (MPEP 2400)

PART 4 – Applications
10) Examination (MPEP 700)
11) Parts, Form, and Content (MPEP 600)
12) Type and Status (MPEP 200)

PART 5 – Everything Else
13) Secrecy, Access, National Security & Foreign Filing (MPEP 100)
14) Ownership and Assignment (MPEP 300)
15) Representative of Inventor or Owner (MPEP 400)
16) Receipt and Handling of Mail and Papers (MPEP 500)
17) Restriction and Double Patenting (MPEP 800)
18) Classification and Search (MPEP 900)
19) Matters Decided by PTO Officials – Petitions (MPEP 1000)
20) SIR (MPEP 1100)
21) Appeal (MPEP 1200)
22) Allowance and Issue (MPEP 1300)
23) Correction of Patents (MPEP 1400)
24) Document Disclosure Program (MPEP 1700)
25) PCT (MPEP 1800)
26) Protests (MPEP 1900)
27) Duty of Disclosure (MPEP 2000)
28) Citation of Prior Art and Ex Parte Reexam (MPEP 2200)
29) Interferences (MPEP 2300)
30) Maintenance Fees (MPEP 2500)
31) Reexam (Inter Parte) (MPEP 2600)
32) Patent Terms and Extensions (MPEP 2700)

{ 2 trackbacks }

kopa guld
March 2, 2012 at 4:22 pm
"browse around here"
October 26, 2013 at 7:45 am

{ 733 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Mark El-DeiryNo Gravatar November 2, 2007 at 9:05 pm

Hello,

I have been reviewing this website for a couple weeks and have learned a lot. What happened to the rest of the modules? It looks as though this project was never completed. Do you have any further modules which you have not published that I might use for patent bar review?

Do you know of any other sites – besides the links you’ve listed here – that I can use to review?

I greatly appreciate your site and have benefitted greatly from your work. I hope it will continue. Have you considered posting “ads by google” on the site to generate income from the traffic to your site? I hope to hear from you soon and look forward to seeing any additional materials or websites you can recommend. Thank you!

Mark.

Reply

2 patentbarNo Gravatar December 17, 2007 at 8:59 pm

Question via email -
What is the difference between MPEP 2100 and 700?

As a broad generalization, MPEP 700 deals more with hard rules and procedures (e.g., a publication with this priority chain is 102(e) art as of this date), whereas MPEP 2100 deals more with standards that are applied when determining patentability (e.g., what makes a particular invention “obvious”).

Reply

3 vtxNo Gravatar February 28, 2008 at 1:03 pm

Just a quick note to say thank you for a wonderful and informative site, which I found yesterday. I am busy preparing for the Patent Bar at this moment and the info on your site is very helpful with the study – goodness knows that this stuff is tedious to say the least.
Thanks again – the site is much appreciated.

Reply

4 DanNo Gravatar April 27, 2008 at 5:19 am

I am sorry that I did not come across this site earlier.

A fantastic resource for someone, like myself, who is studying for the patent bar.

Activity seems to have stopped on December 2007?

Dan

Reply

5 patentbarNo Gravatar May 1, 2008 at 8:57 pm

Thanks Dan,
I have been really busy and studying for the patent bar was pushed further down “the list” the past several months. I plan on resuming my studies and the site next week.

Reply

6 mmmNo Gravatar May 18, 2008 at 5:32 pm

I took the exam yesterday and passed. I’d say a fair 25%-33% of the questions were straight from previous tests that I had seen while taking the PRG ExamWare tests. The following questions were on mine:

1. The mirror question. The question is which of the following subject to a rejection under 112? The answer choices were, (i) while the spec discloses only a mirror, you can replace “mirror” in a claim with a “reflective material” since the reflective nature is inherent; (ii) you can replace mirror in the spec with the dictionary definition; and some others… I think that the answer is the first one since reflective material is probably not enabled by picking a single reflective material.

2. I had a weird question about which of three things could a copy of a signature be used: amendment under 1.111, authorization to charge a credit card, or an oath or dec.

3. I had the claiming priority to french phone design patent.

4. The hairgel question (with Buzz, not einstein). This question asked about product brochure of a competitor and asked which was the best way to present the new material. Inter partes reexam would be a good choice, but for the date (too early). There was other citation of prior art and ex parte reexam answers.

5. I had a question about which rejection would be appropriate with the prior art disclosed 35.1% and the patent had the range of 20-35%. There were answers: 102, 102 and a preliminary 103, and 103.

6. I had the Bloc question about “pain alleviation” and the “cure for cancer”

7. There were quite a few questions about practice after final rejection (2-3), but I can’t recall any of them.

8. I had a question about when a declaration (?) will be treated as an amendment.

9. I had the question about an RCE without a fee before an appeals decision.

10. I had a several PCT questions… like 6 maybe. I think I had two questions about Japan.

11. There were at least two 102(e) questions including a question about the effective date for a non-provisional originating as an international application claiming priority to a US provisional.

12. There was the question that included the answer that the published, unexamined German pieces of paper are not 102(d) art.

A couple of other points about the exam:
1. I basically did not take much of a lunch. I stepped out, ate a sandwich, and went back in.
2. The search function is frustrating. During practice, I would jump to the section and then start searching from there. You can’t do that in the real exam. It starts from the beginning of the chapter. I was unable to get it to do anything else.
a. There is a “find again” button but if you’re in a long chapter and it doesn’t find your search phrase, there’s no way to cancel the searching. You have to wait until it scans through all 350 pages. If you click the “leave search box open” you can avoid this issue.
b. It’s slow. It takes a good few seconds even to find search terms on the same page because of how the “find next” works.
c. The one nice thing: it automatically returns you to the same place in the MPEP if you click “done” on the MPEP to return to the answer screen and then want to go back to the MPEP.
d. There’s no way to have to sections open at the same time. So if you want to run to the rules, you’ll lose your position in the other chapter.
3. While taking the PRG tests I was finishing 50 questions with about an hour to spare. On the real test I was finishing with about 25-30 minutes to spare. I blame this mostly on the search incapabilities.
4. The marked question procedure actually works pretty well. If you mark a question, once you get to the end you can review JUST the marked questions. If you plan on doing this, I suggest that 1) you pick an answer anyway, 2) write down quick notes about the search that you already performed.
5. BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT ACCIDENTALLY CLICKING. It’s very easy to select (or unselect) an answer when setting focus on the answer screen. Reclicking on an answer will UNSELECT that answer even though no other answer is selected.
6. My first half was considerably harder than my second half. A friend who took it at the same time as me reported just the opposite.
7. The exam is really not that tough.

Best of luck!

Reply

7 mmmNo Gravatar May 18, 2008 at 6:56 pm

other ones that were on the exam: lip gloss as gag gift and Laurel & Hardy:
14.
On August 7, 1997, practitioner Costello filed a patent application identifying Laurel,
Abbot, and Hardy as inventors. Each named inventor assigned his patent rights to Burns just
prior to the application being filed. Laurel and Abbot, alone, jointly invented the subject matter
of independent claim 1 in the application. Hardy contributed to inventing the subject matter of
claim 2. Claim 2 properly depends upon claim 1. The examiner rejected claim 1 and claim 2
under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) as anticipated by a journal article by Allen, dated July 9, 1997. Laurel,
Abbot, and Hardy are readily available to provide evidence in support of and sign an antedating
affidavit under 37 C.F.R. § 1.131 showing reduction to practice of the subject matter of claims 1
and 2 prior to July 9, 1997. Which of the following may properly make an affidavit under 37
C.F.R. § 1.131 to overcome the rejection of claims 1 and 2.?
(A) Laurel and Abbot.
(B) Laurel, Abbot, and Hardy.
(C) Laurel, Hardy and Burns.
(D) Burns only.
(E) None of the above.

Reply

8 mmmNo Gravatar May 18, 2008 at 7:22 pm

The claim counting question was also on there where the answer is 147.

Reply

9 rNo Gravatar June 12, 2008 at 12:16 am

does anyone know which revision of the mpep that the current patent registration exam test is based on?

Reply

10 upnorthguyNo Gravatar June 27, 2008 at 10:58 pm

Rev. 4 (started being covered by exam in 10/06…)

Reply

11 MikeNo Gravatar June 29, 2008 at 6:26 pm

Quick question for anyone who has already taken the computerized exam. Can anyone give a guess of how many of the “repeat questions” you saw on the exam. It is like 1 or 2, 10-15, 30-40, etc?

Thanks,
Mike

Reply

12 upnorthguyNo Gravatar July 2, 2008 at 12:57 am

Mike-

Word on the street is the number varies, anywhere between 15 and 25-30ish.
Check out discussion at intelproplaw(look at the most recent last page of the forum posting with Subject “New Patent Bar Online Exam – Prometric”)

Reply

13 dk152No Gravatar July 7, 2008 at 10:35 pm

Mike,

I took it on 7/5/08 and about 25-30 questions were from the repeated questions/old exam questions. I studied April and October 2003 exams extensively.

Reply

14 neilNo Gravatar July 18, 2008 at 6:51 am

Hey all,

Like i said before on the old test section of this website, nothing beats studying for this test than taking old exams and then analyzing why you got the answer wrong or right. helps if you have a spreadsheet to track it. i think that over 70% of the exam is repeat concept testing (you will see the same cite i.e. 608.01n etc repeated over and over).

my advice is start with the 2003 exam and work your way back to 1998 unitl you can score 95 – 100 % on those exams by taking them over and over again.

best of luck
Neil

Reply

15 ibtech38No Gravatar August 19, 2008 at 3:19 pm

Since the current Patent Bar exam is so random and tricky in the selection questions, this site has the best approach in helping us to prepare the exams especially the report on the latest test questions.

Thanks for the informative site and appreciate all the effort.

Reply

16 sana shaikhNo Gravatar October 18, 2008 at 1:19 pm

Hi,

this is a great site and i thank you for it. sometimes, however, i am not able to access it. it requires a login and password and even then it says this is a protected blog. can you send me the login and password so i can enter it later on. send it to my email
thanks so much

sana

Reply

17 Aug25/2008No Gravatar November 23, 2008 at 9:35 pm

Does anyone know the answer to the Laurel, Abbot, and Hardy question?

Reply

18 DavidNo Gravatar December 5, 2008 at 3:12 pm

Any current update for the TEST ?

Reply

19 SamNo Gravatar December 14, 2008 at 10:39 am

I just passed the Patent Bar. Great website and thanks! The best way to pass is to know how to quickly search through the mpep, and UNDERSTAND the old test questions (Dont memorize them because they vary many repeat questions). Know when you should search the actual MPEP or 37 CFR (the patent rules). You save a lot of time by looking through 37 CFR rather than the MPEP.

Reply

20 TimLNo Gravatar December 16, 2008 at 10:37 pm

Just took the test and failed, unfortunately. Lots more questions about appeals and PCT, almost nothing on claims. I wish I had found this site sooner; PRG was very detailed, but didn’t build a bridge to referencing the MPEP. I’ll try again ASAP.

Reply

21 SlimNo Gravatar December 20, 2008 at 12:59 pm

Took the test yesterday and failed by 9 points. My first part of test didn’t have any repeats. I felt like questions were really confusing. Lots of questions on 103, 102 e, certificate of corrections, quite a few on PCT.

Second Part of exam- probably about 10 repeaats
Japan-45 days
Moondust
Tribell
Japan 45 days
American resident but Japanese National filiing a PCT application in US in Japanese Language-forward to IB w/ a free equal to transmittal fee

few questions 2 months from final office action and advisory action is sent within the three months-extension of fee payment starts from?
advisory action is sent after three months -extension of time starts from?
Who can sign the terminal disclaimer?
A question: Your patent gets 102 b bar over another Patent X, same composition but Patent X is for polishing shoes and ur caliming for growing hair. wut do you do a)nothing b) aruge different use c)argue process claim d) and e) i don’t remember. I picked “c”
counting dependent claims
a lot of 102e questions
appeal questions-few were repeats
Laminate questions-variant
Rexamination certificate is open to public
102(g) questions
a lot of PCT questions

I was scoring 95 on past 2003 and 2002 questions. I think if i had a few repeat questions on the first one, I wud have passed. It just sucks to take it again. Also, know how to search on the exam. I didn’t have to search everything on the first part. I would read 700 and 2100 very carefully. Master in 102 e and PCT and appeals.

This cite is very very helpful to pass the test. I was really surprised I didn’t pass.

Reply

22 SandybossNo Gravatar December 22, 2008 at 11:20 pm

Just passed today; wasn’t that hard but I was well prepared. I took PLI and it was very helpful to understand the basics. This site is very useful but I think it will be a big mistake to just rely on past questions. Sure, there were about 10 repeat questions but they do come with some variations and memorizing answers won’t help. Make sure you get around 70% correct in first attempt while trying old exams. That will show how much gas you got. Eventually you will make it to >90% after couple of attempts. Some of the repeat questions:
Japan-45 days
Tribell
American resident but Japanese National filiing a PCT application in Japanese. I think its tricky and the application shouldn’t be sent to IB since its American resident.
Costa Rica citizens filing PCT in USPTO, will be sent to IB preserving filing date.
Laminate questions
Rexamination certificate is open to public.
Remember broadening dependent claim in reissue application without affecting independent claim is not broadening reissue.
1.56 fraud where inventor assigne confess after third party protest that inventor concealed a publication from attorney.
At least 3 oath and declaration questions, 3 restrictions questions,
Mirror question
A) because the definition of mirror automatically includes its reflective qualities, there is no need to amend the specification to include the reflective qualities (E) the mirror in one part of the specification is “parallel,” and the mirror in another part is “perpendicular,” the specification is conflicting and one who has knowledge in the art would not be able to tell the difference so you amend the specification (answer).
PCT post 11/29/00 102e question
Applicant filing national application claiming priority from PCT application (filed before 11/29/00) that claims priority from US provisional. What will be 102e. The answer is filing date of US filing Remember, pre 11/29/00 PCT application has no calculated 102e (unlike PCT origin US patent.
Best mode question.
Spanish phone question (102d/172, cip)
Appeal: New ground of rejection
Small entity, filing assignment fee is not reduced.
Documents an Assignee Not of Record can sign

One question was, what things can an assignee sign, if he has never properly recorded his ownership?

MPEP 324 VII. WHEN OWNERSHIP NEED NOT BE ESTABLISHED
Filing small entity status
Means-Function Claim language question; factors examiner consider to make rejections
What happens both inventors die after notice of allowance, no assignment
One question what form examiner uses for reference citation
Small Entity’s Filing Fee – Refund

Applicant accidentally paid large entity filing fee even though entitled to small entity status. Can he get a refund and how long does he have to apply? Remember 3 month time to file refund can’t be extended.
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.
Maintenance Fee payment not accepted, how to file petition
Divisional Reissue

A patent containing claims 1-10 has issued. The subject matter of claims 1-5 was invented by inventor A, who has assigned his rights to your client, company C. The subject matter of claims 6-10 was invented by inventor B, who refuses to cooperate with company C unless he is the sole named inventor of his own patent. Company C wishes to divide the claims such that one patent contains only claims 1-5 and has inventor A as the sole inventor, and another patent contains claims 6-10 and has inventor B as the sole inventor. How should you advise your client?
A Claim claiming several compositions is anticipated by prior art claiming single composition in range.
A lack of utility rejection; claiming cancer cure but credible utility for alleviating pain can avoid rejection.
Good Luck!

Reply

23 StevenNo Gravatar January 4, 2009 at 3:00 am

I passed the exam today (01-03-2009). It wasn’t easy by any means, but it is doable if you’ve put in the time to study. There were several repeat questions, probably around 15-20. A lot of the repeats were from PLI’s practice questions as well as old exams. There were about 5 questions pertaining to appeals, 5 pertaining to obviousness, and about 5-7 dealing with PCT. I’ll look over this site to see which repeats seem familiar and if I can find any repeats in my study materials. A few that I can remember right now are the DRAM question, Lip Gloss, and the questions about decisions of the Courts binding on the PTO. There was also a question about Protest and Maintenance fees. 102 showed up quiet a few times and enablement and best mode at least factored into a question two times each.

Reply

24 cheesepepNo Gravatar January 4, 2009 at 9:05 pm

For the American resident but Japanese national question posed by SandyBoss, can anyone clairfy this issue? I know that since he/she is an American resident, it should be filed with the USPTO, but since it is also in Japanese…should it be forwarded to the IB?

Reply

25 StevenNo Gravatar January 5, 2009 at 1:55 am

@ Cheesepep

That’s correct. That question was on my exam and it will still be accorded the filing date that it was filed at the PTO, the only thing is that it will be forwarded to the IB and the IB will act as the receiving office.

Reply

26 pizzaNo Gravatar January 8, 2009 at 12:31 am

took it a couple of days ago…

2 variations on 3 months OA, response filed within 2 months (and 1 question response filed after 2 months), then advisory action. When is the due date for extensions calculated from?

Japan 45 days

1214.01

MPEP 324 Section 7

Australia 30 months PCT

102(e) date calculations…use 706.02f flowchart…was variation on one of the questions posted here about continuation of an international app filed before Nov 29, 2000 (and not after as posted here)

Small entity status…claimed large status…I forgot details…how can he claim refund…answer was he cannot claim refund

Design, 6 months to file priority

Variation on laminate question (direct opposite)…tricky because 2 answers were similar…one said comprising, one said consisting

1.56 fraud

Shoe polish, hair gel question. I choose that he should patent the invention using the product or something.

American national, Japanese resident, app filed in Japanese…app will be forwarded to IB with fee equal to the transmittal fee

Pain alleviation and cure for cancer

Change of ownership…several questions….one question was 2 inventors. I did not want the other one to be listed. What to do? answers were (1) do nothing 2) file protest 3) file 1.48 4) wait for patent to issue, then 1.324 when all inventors were not in agreement…5) file petition after patent issued (I choose this)

MPEP 2286…court cases binding

in a reexamination and in response to a first office action, an extension of time may be granted for sufficient cause and a reasonable amount of time

1.377 maintenance fee

Some fax questions

when is an examiner likely to consider an amendment after an appeal? ans- two months from the date of the supplemental examiner’s answer

notice of appeal does not require a signature

copy of signature may be used with authorization to charge a charge/deposit account 502.02

what’s required to make sure assignee is printed on divisional patent (make sure name is on issue fee transmittal form, answer (e)

112 6th paragraph…”means for” “step of” with reference to the specification

Lost mail and due dates

Calculating the number of DEPENDENT claims…6 claims all dependent on sole independent claim 1. 2 depends on 1. 3 depends on 2. 4 depends on 2-3. 5 depends on 3. 6 depends on 3-5.

Multiple dependent claim question

Overcoming 102(b) question

Gum adhesion in supermarket

Change in drawing submitted within 30 days of PCT app…same filing date?

What is required for a filing date in a reissue app? filing fee?

Contents of a reissue app?

Who can file a reissue app? (lots of reissue app questions)

Something about someone wants to provoke an interference

Conversion of a nonprovisional to a provisional app…what is required?

Drawing 5 gets lost in the mail. What can you present to preserve initial filing date? answers were (1) submit USPTO filing postcard saying drawings 1-5 included and (2) submit express mail showing evidence of all 5 figures saying “5 figures” (I think this is the right answer but I didnt choose it)

something about filing an app in a NAFTA or a US country

know who can sign a reissue app, and various other documents

product by process question

some question about 1.131 in a reissue app? 1.132 only refers to reexams right?

Henrietta camera question

Reply

27 the lesser mpepNo Gravatar March 25, 2014 at 7:00 pm

Spend time on 100 200 300 and the lesser chapters

Reply

28 JohnNo Gravatar January 28, 2009 at 10:34 am

Just passed the exam yesterday after 2nd try =P

Failed the first time with a 68% and about 50 hours of study (pretty much just took the PLI home study course). I think I studied another 100 hours to make sure I didn’t fail again (mostly went over the old exams). By the way, I also work in the field. I can’t imagine being able to pass this test without working in the field, but I’m sure somebody’s done it =P

Either way, there were tons of repeat questions from all the old exams…roughly 25-30. The ones that come to mind, and are not surprises:

Japan/45 days
Compound Y
DRAM
Laurel and Hardy
Buzzcut’s Hairgel

There were a whole bunch of appeal questions. 5-6 PCT questions, 2 protest. There were a surprising amount of duty of disclosure and access questions, I think about 5-6.

For those of you studying for the exam now, I recommend (like everyone else) study, study, study ALL the old exams. Know them cold. While you’re reviewing your answers be sure to read the relevant portions of the MPEP/law/rules so you really understand the answers.

By the way, don’t get discouraged with the old exams. The old exams can be more frustrating than the actual exam because many of the old questions are poorly written/unclear and, many times, the old questions are directed toward laws and rules that have since changed. None the less, the old exams are by far the best study tool.

Good luck everybody!

Reply

29 the lesser mpepNo Gravatar March 25, 2014 at 7:01 pm

Don’t worry about failing the first time because most people do. Review your old test and take it again.

Reply

30 patentNo Gravatar February 5, 2009 at 12:50 am

I took the test today and passed.

Easier than I thought and I am sure that I made 85+.

There are around 10+ regarding to the PCT 1800, which is sort of easy if you remember the index(you will have plenty time to search the MPEP, no rush).

Repeated questions are around 15-20. I didnt count because there is always variants and USPTO tends to switch some of choice or add some new irrelevant answers to trick those who only remembers answer but not underlying rationales.

It will be really really helpful if you DO read MPEP but if you only read outline here and remember where to search for answers, you will be very very fine.

Again, no rush during the test, you have 3 hours to crack it down. In my case, I finished each session within 2 hours.

Finally, I am really thankful that I found out this website 2 wks ago and it really helped a lot.

Reply

31 Michael JenningsNo Gravatar February 5, 2009 at 2:48 pm

Passed the Patent bar today, Thank you Jesus! I really thought the test was really straight forward. I had to have seen at least 50 repeats between the old test and the reported new questions. In addition, another 5 or 6 were pretty easy common sense. PCT for US receiving Office not applicants but gets US filing date two 102(e)questions. Mirror question, Tribell reissue, VELCRO.

Reply

32 mypatentbarNo Gravatar February 11, 2009 at 3:37 pm

Checking.

Reply

33 DanNo Gravatar February 15, 2009 at 4:38 pm

Hi there,

I am preparing for the patent bar. I’ve been studying for 6 months now. I am readying from several sources, but I don’t know what to expect on the exam. Do you know what type of files are provided during the exams? Is the MPEP and 37 CFR available only? Can you search the whole file, or is one chapter at a time? Can you browse the content by selecting a link on the side like in the PDF files?

Any details would be appreciated…

Reply

34 NoriNo Gravatar February 16, 2009 at 7:42 am

>>Dan

I used Patentbar.com material, and the MPEP provided was pretty much identical using Acrobat 5.1 i think. Just the search function was little slow I think since I use pretty high end PC.

I would suggest more of getting used to pretty much big text. My monitor at home is 26in with 1920×1200 resolution. It seems like the test was administered in 800×600 or something like that. The text on the test were HUGE and the monitor was little blurry (not at optimum resolution). Same with the MPEP, it was little blurry.

Don’t get worried about whether having problem with using the MPEP. If you can use the computer and internet to a point of finding this website(assuming you started at google or other sites like intelproplaw.com etc…) you will have absolutely NO PROBLEM getting used to it in 10-15seconds.

Good luck on the test, and like others said make sure to know the problems of 2002-2003(pretty much memorized), and the other problems (past exam, and reported exmas on here) down cold. With out that, I would never have passed the first try.Just don’t give up studying. More time you spent, the higher the pass rate for sure.

Reply

35 SamNo Gravatar February 18, 2009 at 1:08 am

Hi,

Can anyone tell me the correct answer for the museum titanium baseball question?

Reply

36 patentNo Gravatar February 23, 2009 at 5:29 pm

Sam,

answer to your question really depends on what you are asking here. public use or prior art? for details, please check exam questions and concept in this website. you will find it very helpful.

Reply

37 PLI GuyNo Gravatar March 3, 2009 at 5:14 pm

Just passed the patent bar (probably 1hr ago) on my first try and wanted to do my part to contribute. I had no previous exposure to patents. I used PLI materials and this site

1) Went through all PLI lectures and assoicated practice questions
2) Reviewed tests from 2003-2002 (x3)
3) Reviews new and repeated questions from this site and the wiki (http://patentbarquestions.com/Questions_reportedly_asked_in_the_Patent_Bar_Exam)(x2)
4) I had about 10 repeats – If you follow the methods above you should do fine.
5) Now I’m off to law school :) .

Reply

38 ColinNo Gravatar March 4, 2009 at 11:48 pm

I’m going to be taking the test a week from today. A couple questions 1. How similar is the exam taken in the same month? (same questions just rearranged? or is it an entirely different test every day) and 2. PLI guy, which were the 10 repeats you saw?

Reply

39 Just Passed TodayNo Gravatar March 14, 2009 at 5:55 pm

I just took the exam today and passed.
I saw a lot repeat questions from this site. I used the lecture video tapes (2004 Barbri with lecture notes), new MPEP from PTO website and old exam questions.
Know the questions on this site well. They will help you a lot!!!!

Reply

40 SamNo Gravatar March 15, 2009 at 12:04 am

Hi Just passed today, can you please advise which new questions you saw..i.e. questions not posted on this site? Thank you. I’d highly appreciate it

Reply

41 Just Passed TodayNo Gravatar March 15, 2009 at 7:10 am

Sam,

Below are the questions from this site which I saw on the test. Some were variations and not exactly the same. Hope this helps.
——————————–

Parking Meter (10.03.28p)
Moondust (10.03.6p)
Five Steps to Cross a Road (10.03.23a)
Door Handle (10.03.24a)
Tribell (10.03.16a)
35 USC 102(d) (10.03.8a) variation
147 Claim Counting (10.03.50a/4.03.28p)
Bloc; Synthetic Z (10.03.7a/4.03.32p)
Lancer Toothbrush (4.03.33a)
Board Decisions (4.03.37a)
Japan/nonpublication request/45 days (10.03.44a/4.03.2a)
Third Party Submissions (10.02.46a)
Facsimile Transmissions (10.02.49a)
Hair Gel (4.02.37p)
Mr. Brick (4.02.24a)
37 CFR 1.8 and 1.10 (4.02.16a)
35 USC 102(e) (4.02.11a)
35 USC 103, 102(f) and 102 (g) (10.01.26a)
Obviousness (10.01.30a)
35 USC 101 (10.01.6a)
Prior Art (10.00.16a)
102 (f) (4.00.44p)
102(b) dates (4.00.41p)
Reexamination (4.00.47a)
Prior Art (4.00.42a)
Bond 60%C or 60%D (4.00.27a)
Obviousness (4.00.32a)
Tommie and Jo(4.00.23a/4.00.24a)

Reply

42 ColinNo Gravatar March 17, 2009 at 9:56 pm

I just passed the exam a few hours ago. Aside from having most of the questions that “just passed today” noted, I wanted to touch on a few topics I wish I went over more.

Death of an inventor! There was absurdly about 3 questions on this. Inventor assigns invention then dies, what happens? multiple death situations pick which is correct. One more that I forgot. Just make sure you know in fairly good detail what happens, or exactly where to look, I ended up blowing all kinds of time on those questions.

There was one question on 112 sixth paragraph limitations and usage as prior art, I didn’t understand the question remotely and must have spent 15-17 minutes looking for an answer in the MPEP for JUST that question, and ended up not finding a definitive one (memorizing answers to 03′ tests gave me time to do that).

There were less questions on chapter 7 than I was expecting and more from 21 (probably 30-40 from just chp21, including repeats).

there were roughly 3 questions from chapter 19:Protests. I wished I had been more familiar with that. Basically asking when they are OK to make, and do you have to identify yourself when making one, and what parts are required.

People on this blog have mentioned how many PCT questions there are and I figured it would just be more of what was on the practice tests, but they were more complicated fact patterns than I had expected. There was one on correcting a flub in claiming priority dates where the practitioner had listed a provisional app # and a filing date but flipped the date/month so it said April 1st instead of January 4th, how long do you have to correct that? I couldn’t find anything in the MPEP but there was only one answer using the date of the 4th so I guessed that one. There was also a few that threw a whole slew of dates at you most of which being useless, which became kind of overwhelming.

There were a few questions who’s fact patterns I cannot remember that crossed some of the big chapters, for example a PCT application that asked how should you advise client and the options included an appeal route or a reissue route.

I also saw the Jon/John Jones question Oct03′pm #18… except they removed the correct answer and replaced it with “file an ADS”. I’m thinking that was the correct answer. I must have stared at that one for 5 minutes wondering why they took out the answer I memorized.

I honestly went into my lunch break thinking it was hopeless and there was no way I was gonna pass unless I didn’t miss a single one in the afternoon. They must have piled all the beta questions into the morning. The prep I did for this test was study like it was my full time job for 2 weeks, using essentially only this website and the MPEP. Basically If you memorize all 4, 03′ tests (and memorize why the answers are what they are) you’re halfway there (livin’ on a prayer). The other half is memorizing where things are in the MPEP and getting the general gist of everything else on this website. If anyone has any direct questions about what I saw specifically I’d love to help this blog in any way possible due to how much it helped me, so feel free to email at colinfowler@mindspring.com with pointed questions.

Alright, time to celebrate and drink ridiculous amounts of green St. Patties beer.

Reply

43 luisNo Gravatar March 18, 2009 at 5:05 pm

Hey Colin,

Congrats on the passing the exam.. I’m taking it in 2 days, so it is nail bitting time.

questions: What do you mean with chapter 7 and 21?? is that MPEP 700 and 2100 or 7 and 21 as enumerated in the top of the page (ie: 7 design and 21 Appeal)??

on the PCT (Jan 4th) are you sure the question was when can it be fixed or related to petition and payment of a fee??

Reply

44 FlyerNo Gravatar March 18, 2009 at 5:34 pm

I passed today. Glad it’s done. Saw many of the same repeats that others have reported over the last few days. Here’s a quick list:

Spanish phone (CIP variant)
Mirror
Jon/John
Costa Rica PCT
German PCT
Swedish PCT
Tribell
Lancer toothbrush
Synthetic Z
Japan non-publication request
Electric Fan
Broom (multiplicity)
4 factors of means plus function
Investigating deceptive intent
Piecemeal examination
What a non-recorded assignee can sign
Best mode
PTO-892

I also saw several (4-6) restriction questions.

As far as preparation, I attended PLI’s live course, practiced the 02-03 exams (multiple times), and reviewed the questions on this site and patentbarquestions.com a couple times.

Reply

45 JustinNo Gravatar March 18, 2009 at 8:45 pm

Regarding Colin: “There was one on correcting a flub in claiming priority dates where the practitioner had listed a provisional app # and a filing date but flipped the date/month so it said April 1st instead of January 4th, how long do you have to correct that?”

See PCT Rule 26bis.1 “Correction or Addition of Priority Claim.” You have either 16 months from the incorrect priority date or 16 months from the corrected priority date, whichever expires first, but correction must be submitted withing 4 months of international filing date.

Reply

46 SeanNo Gravatar March 19, 2009 at 3:04 pm

I am just starting to study for the Bar. I have a question how to go through this guide – should I start by the chapters/parts or via the categories listed on the left side of this website? What is the best way to achieve most information and also continuity? Thank you in advance. :)

Reply

47 DanNo Gravatar March 19, 2009 at 3:58 pm

This post is for the webmaster of this site…

I know this is a preparation website for the patentbar, and is full of great resources… but as a suggestion for you, I think it would be helpful for many readers to find details of how to get a patent job.

I found it dificult to get information on how to penetrate the patent agent job market. So, my suggestion would be do add a tab for people who work already in this market, and could make suggestions.

I am an EE, and I also hold an MBA. I find it very difficult to find patent agent jobs. Any suggestions? Should I look/inquire with law firms or with techical companies? Do I need any other skills or job experience to be able to land an electrical patent agent? Or is just because of the recession that these jobs are scarce?

Thx,
Dan

Reply

48 luisNo Gravatar March 19, 2009 at 4:38 pm
49 supkanNo Gravatar March 19, 2009 at 5:45 pm

Just passed today…your patent bar prep method inspires me with confidence since I am also working with old lectures (2004 PRG) and old exam papers.
I had a Q regarding studying the MPEP. How much of it should I be studying? Or should i be practising to look things up on the MPEP rather than learning the MPEP itself. Any advice on this from everyone is much appreciated.

Reply

50 JonNo Gravatar March 19, 2009 at 11:00 pm

This message is in response to Dan from Mar. 19, 2009. I don’t think the market is scarce at all for EE patent agents, it is just a matter of finding the right way in. And no, you usually don’t need any experience in the legal realm to land a patent agent position. I personally got hired right out of engineering grad school into my law firm, with no long term engineering industry experience. I am currently working as a patent agent in a law firm and we are completely swamped. Not only that, I get contacted by headhunters at least twice a week looking to get me to jump to other law firms. Also, on some of the daily patent law journals out there, I see daily ads for patent agent positions, namely in IP360. I recommend finding out what firms have technical advisor/patent agent positions and contacting them directly and contacting some of the legal placement headhunter organizations. At least from the inside, there seems to be a plentiful amount of work and positions to go around. Hope this helps! Good luck!

Reply

51 Studying New MommyNo Gravatar March 21, 2009 at 7:23 am

Hello,

I just began studying for the patent bar this week and don’t really know where to begin, I tried to enroll in the BarBri course but it is not offered in my area until July. I would like to take it sooner.

I have attempted self study based off all the comments I read here. It’s helpful, yet also difficult with a 1 year old.

So I thought I would throw it out just in case…ANYONE THAT RECENTLY PASSED WILLING TO SELL THEIR PLI HOMESTUDY MATERIAL? So far it seems like many of the recent passers have used that material. I can honestly only afford to spend $500. I know it’s worth more, but that’s all I have right now…or I can exchange services (I make wedding invitations…and not the cheap border/printed ones, nice fancy pocketfold ones).

Anyhow…any attempt to make things better for the little one was worth a shot to me =)

Reply

52 Studying New MommyNo Gravatar March 22, 2009 at 10:40 pm

Email:mychellejane@hotmail.com

Reply

53 heavenNo Gravatar March 23, 2009 at 10:08 pm

Today I passed my exam, fisrt try.

I hope I can contribute something for this forum. I knew this website 2 months ago, but I really used it two days ago. It helped me a lot. Thanks for the help.

I started my preparation after I get the confirmation mail from USPTO. Before that, I have no clue where to start. I bought a Patent Law textbook and read it. Also read MPEP. These are totally wrong for this exam.

Then I knew there is a PLI, so I bought a second-hand one. The new one is too expensive, and I cannot afford it. PLI is a good start for this exam, but not enough. It can help you understand this exam very quickly. Trust me, I never read 2100, 700, 1800 and 600 from start to the end. These are suggested by John White. I only read PLI courses followed with audio cd for once, then I focused on all the exams, from 1997 to 2003. PLI has one book, I forgot the name. That book explains all the key words in MPEP. That is very good. I read it for more than 3 times.I listened to CDs whenever I have time such as in GYM and drivng my cars. I believe I listened these Cds for more than 3 times. but NO reading.
AT the beginning, when I did exercise, I felt very frustrated because I can only get around 50% accuracy. No matter how hard I try, my accuracy is never more than 72%. I completed a first-round exercise,although I knew my accuracy was so bad.

I continued to do previous exams again and again. Maybe more than 4 times? Finally I can pick up an answer for most of questions without reading the questions themselves. When I read the answers, I can guess what USPTO wants to test. Actually when you exercised more and more, you will feel the questions can be represented by different KEYwords. You can get an answer from the keywords. The question just doesnot matter. USPTO is not good at providing good questions, since they made the wrong answers, and they are so obviously wrong.

Last round I used this website. Around 1 and half days to go over all the questions. 2 Days should be enough.

I like to talk something about the exam itself.

The rules I applied: COMMON SENSE and KEYWORD RULES.

Common sense: for example, when you saw a MUST,ONLY etc, you have to be very careful. Except that I can 100% sure that MUST and ONLY are right, I would not select them.

KEYWORD RULES: when you saw some words that you never saw in all previous exam, just igore them.

There are around 20 repeat questions, all can be found from this forum, so it is unnecessary for me to repeat them one by one. You have PLENTY OF time to check the answer from MPEP. When you are not sure the answer, DON”T GUESS. CHECK MPEP. MPEP can provide answers for 90% of questions. AGAIN, DONOT GUESS and DON”T RUSH. YOU HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO FINISH THE EXAM.

Tons of questions from APPEAL,REISSUE, PCT and 103 obvious.

Some questions never shown in this forum:

PCT has one:I don;t know the questions, but my answer is amend claim only, to IB( I selected the answer without reading questions, haha, KEYWORD rule,:-))

Another PCT:102(e) prior 11/29/2000
PCT to french, to US national stage without executed declaration( I selected abandoned because of no exectued declaration)
PCT in Australia, I selected A, never abandoned( I knew the one in this forum put an abandoned answer for this one.But I checked the applicant met all requirements, so I

one question for cfr 1.42 and cfr 1.47 for which one is wrong. I selected the A. I believe when you read the MPEP.

one questions for restriction for combination, subcombination, you can find the answer from MPEP.

a question talking about restriction requirment
a question talking about best mode requirments( at least I know best mode requirement different from enablement requirement), I selected the one ” the applicant doesn’t need to point out which one is the best mode.

some questions regarding to new grounds of rejections. You will be able to find answers from MPEP.

In my first 50 questions, I marked around 10, but only about 2-3 that I have no clue and I don’t know where I can start. As far as the second 50, I only marked 3. When I finished 86 out of 100, I knew I will pass for sure. So it will be doable for anybody. I am just preparing for it during my spare time. I work as a full-time engineer.
I started it after I received the mail confirmation from USPTO.

AGAIN, the KEY is repeat previous exams until you feel sick with such stupid questions. This willl build up your confidence.

BTW, if your guys don’t mind, I want to sell my PLI second hand courses, including everything. Send me an email: e2981604@hotmail.com for the course. Thanks a lot!

Good luck to everyone!

Reply

54 heavenNo Gravatar March 23, 2009 at 10:11 pm

actually don’t even waster time on previous exam before 2000.

Reply

55 SeanNo Gravatar March 24, 2009 at 1:14 am

Hi heaven,

Where did you find the second-hand PLI material? Also, would it be possible for me to buy it from you? Your input contributed to building my confidence, CFR by CFR! :) Thank you.

Sean

Reply

56 HeavenNo Gravatar March 24, 2009 at 8:46 am

Sean,

You can send me an email firstly to e2981604@hotmail.com.

Best regards,

Reply

57 luisNo Gravatar March 24, 2009 at 1:26 pm

hi there, just passed last Friday.. second try.. I was ill prepared the first time, I focused on MPEP and the PRG video lessons and only had time to do about 150 questions of the PRG ExamWare. I did not know of this site and the “new reported questions” or the “repeat questions”. I had a 58% that time.
I remember the first test I took back in November was heavy on re-examination, appeal and PCT, something well documented in several forums but that I was unaware of. I also remember the morning exam was extremely difficult compared to the afternoon one.
This time around was different, both am/pm tests were about the same level, I don’t think the test was heavy on any particular subject and I had only about 15 repeat questions (5-6 am and 8-9 pm). I took the Apr/Nov03 tests about 4 times each, I could finish the 100 question of the test in 1:30 hrs usually missing only 1 or 2. I also took the repeats from the previous tests (99-2002) 75 questions total, 4 times. I had the PRG ExamWare software and I did all the PCT, Reissue, reexamination, appeal, restriction and interference questions (about 250 questions) twice. I was scoring on the 90% the week before the test.
Reading this and posts on other sites was very useful to get “new” questions or at least an idea of what a questions was about but I had the feeling at reading at some posts that the exam was easy, you know the: “passed first try, only studied for 2 weeks”, “all I did was to take the 2003 tests 3 times”, etc, etc… I tell you, these people are either not telling the truth or are in the 0.1% of the genius class that do not need to study. the pass rate is 40% that means 6 out of 10 will NOT pass, so study until you think is overkill and then study some more. I had to take it twice and I can tell you it is not something you want to do twice, if you registered to take the test you better make sure you pass it first try and that is only done by studying like there is no tomorrow for I will say at least 2 months. make it 2 hours a day for the first months and then build it up until you can take 200 questions in a day two weeks before the test.

Now to the questions I saw in my test not reported above:
1) I had 3 questions on provisional filing where they try to confuse you with the cover sheet (first time I see something on cover sheets on an exam). One question was what is needed to get a filing date (q1), the other was of the type: what is in accord with USPTO blah, blah except (q2) and the other one was something about a provisional filed without a cover sheet (q3). Just remember: cover sheets are NOT needed to get a filing day (q1) but they ARE needed for a COMPLETE provisional filling (q2 said something like cover sheets are unnecessary for a complete provisional filling) and if the cover sheet is not attached to the provisional application then the application is treated as a non-provisional (q3).
2) I had a tricky variation of Apr/01 AM #38 (not reported in the repeat question list) the question is about a small entity paying for the full filling fee and requesting a refund: 3 answers were easy to cross, something like a) cannot; b) you have 2 years; c) it was not a mistake so you will not get a refund; then there was d) 3 months extendable with 37 CFR 1.136 and e) 3 months no extension. answer is e, but please read the questions in Apr/01 #38AM.
3) I had a clever questions on a guy that filed a non-provisional application without a claim, what can he do to keep the filing date? you had choices like a) nothing b) file a claim via amendment and keep the original f/d c) file a claim via amendment and keep the new f/d; and then d) convert to a provisional and request refund of the excess fees or e) convert to provisional (no mention to refund). the answer is e) but again read the MPEP.
4) who can sign a terminal disclaimer if applicant assigned 40% to corporation A and 40% to corporation B? read the MPEP on assignments but if you are reading this 10 min before the test know that if the application has not assigned 100% of the rights to a single entity then it doesn’t need to cosign or is allowed to sign, therefore only the inventor/applicant can sign.
5) I had question that tries to trick you with fact that certificate of mailing is allowed for OA replies but if you mail a notice of appeal the date accorded is the date it is received by the USPTO, the question was something like: you got a final OA with 3 month SSP on Jan/16 you mailed a reply to the final OA together with a notice of appeal with a certificate of mailing on the 16/april that was received in the USPTO on Monday the 19/April. today is Monday 21/Jul. When, if any, is the appeal brief due w/out extension of time? answers were of the kind: a) application abandoned because reply to OA was late (19/Apr) b) Application abandoned because time to file appeal brief was 16/Jul; c)application is not abandoned but need to pay 1 month extension to file appeal brief; d) you can file appeal brief today without paying extension of time (this is the answer).
6) when is the fee not reduced for small entity: documents affecting the tittle.

Reply

58 luisNo Gravatar March 24, 2009 at 2:04 pm

7) I had a questions on Protest: the protest was introduced in the USPTO after the application was published but it was served to the applicant before the publication. will the examiner consider the protest or not? I’m not 100% sure of the answer but I think the examiner will not enter the protest.

some tips that proved useful for me:
-many questions will try to confuse you with overcoming a 102 rejection with 103 arguments, for example: there is a 102(e) rejection and 3 of the answers are: argue commercial success or long felt need or extraordinary results. these 103 arguments will never overcome a 102 rejection.
-Remember you can combine references for a 102 rejection if one of the references is used for establishing an inherent characteristic of a reference for example. 102 not always absolutely need to be one reference.
-Remember that to use 1.131 affidavit the reference patent can NOT claim the same claimed invention (if it does, then only way forward is interference if reference patent issued less than 1 year). you will be able to reject some of the answers quickly is you see “reference disclosed and CLAIMED the same invention” then you know you cannot use 1.131 affidavit.
-Be careful, as stated by Heaven, when the question shows ONLY or MUST. most of the times a fee is needed: ie: file ONLY an RCE (will not be correct as an RCE must be filed with the fee).
-I did a table 1-50 and A-E during the tutorial as some suggested and put down marking on it like the answer I selected (saved some time in the AM test when I checked if I had left any questions unanswered and found I had not clicked the answer in 2 questions, always check you click an answer even if your are clueless), answers that I knew were wrong so if I had to check the question again I didn’t waste time rechecking it, I marked the question with a check (99% sure), a circle (80% sure but needed to check something), a question mark (for don’t even know where or what to search in the MPEP) and asterisk (for questions I had narrowed down to 2 answers and I knew where I could get the correct answer quickly, the type of question you do not know if a fee is applicable or not). I wrote key words next to the question number to save time.
-I didn’t bother learning 102(e) PCT reference dates but made sure I understood the diagram in 706.02(f).
-I kept a tally of questions I knew where 99% right, that helped me gauge how was I doing during the test. In the AM section I had 27 check marks and about 6 asterisks with an hour to spare so I didn’t look at the other questions and focused on getting the asterisks to check marks. I did the same in the PM I had 30 check marks and 4 asterisks. 10 minutes after the test ended I had 63 check marks and smile in my face.

good luck. if I remember anything else I will post it.

Reply

59 Dan BNo Gravatar March 26, 2009 at 10:20 pm

luis – awesome idea to keep a tally with check marks and asterisks. I took it today, and it kept me settled when I began to panic a bit. I’m not sure I would have passed without it.

I saw a lot of focus on appeal procedure and examiner/appelant/board actions after complete and/or partial upholding of examiners rejections, as well as some examiner actions I hadn’t seen on practice exams as to whether or not they were appealable.

I had no PCT questions in the morning session, but about 5-6 in the afternoon, a lot less than I thought would be there.

There were probably 20 questions from the exam questions tab of this site, so know those.

One piece of advice for everyone – you have time! I was only done with 3 questions 20 minutes in to the afternoon session, so dont freak out. You CAN make up the time. Just get the question right.

Reply

60 BulldozerNo Gravatar March 30, 2009 at 11:34 pm

Very excited, Just passed about 4 hours ago!

I owe a great deal to this website’s contributions and the great information I found here. Without it, I don’t think I would’ve passed.

I saw about 25 repeat questions (including those published after 2003). Keeping with the advice that’s been given, absolutely know the 2003 exams like the back of your hand.

I had maybe 5-7 PCT questions. And about 10 appeals questions as well on stuff like when you can remand, amendments made, rehearing after new rejection by the Board. Quite a few reissue applications, for instance like how to go about amending a reissue. The afternoon section was slightly easier than the morning session; I was done with about 30 minutes to spare. While I barely finished with the morning section. Actually, I was a bit concerned because in the morning section I didn’t see a single PCT question, so I studied my ass off on PCT issues during the lunch break and it really paid off. There were a couple of questions where I spent maybe a good 10 minutes on, and even then, I had to make an educated guess between two choices.

Repeat questions I saw:
- 52 tables (btw. the key to this question is that each table is about 1/2 page length. so because the entire length of the tables is less than 50 pages long, there’s no way you can submit the tables on CD-ROM. Also know that you need a duplicate copy of the CD)
- lip gloss
-DRAM
- titanium baseball publication
- Potter
- foil airplane 103 rejection (variant)
- Compound Y
- Mixture Y made by a process Q1
- e. coli cells
- tribell
- hydrocyclone
- Japan/45 days
- ABCD
- Tip the Moondust eraser maker
- Jon Jones
- electronics control unit drawing
- protective layer, adhesive layer (variant)
- broomstick with 974 dependent claims

Now it’s time to sell my PLI materials!!!

Reply

61 RolfNo Gravatar March 31, 2009 at 11:33 am

WRITTEN EXAM OPTION AT USPTO July 21st and July 22nd

Hi all,

I have just received the following announcement by email, braodcasted by PLI, here is an extract:

“Late this past Thursday afternoon, the Patent Office announced the dates and rules for their upcoming paper-based Registration Examination (“Patent Bar Exam”).
The deadline to submit your application to sit for the paper-based Exam is May 15th, and the paper-based Exam will be given on July 21st and 22nd at the Patent Office in Alexandria, VA (and it costs considerably more to take the paper-based version).” end of quote–”

For further details on the written exam, look up the USPTO OED page.

There are pro’s and con’s in taking the written exam but PLI does not recommend to taking the written exam.

Regards, good luck in your study work.
Rolf

Reply

62 SeanNo Gravatar March 31, 2009 at 12:10 pm

Bulldozer – for how much? :-)

Reply

63 StanNo Gravatar March 31, 2009 at 8:56 pm

I passed today. This was the most difficult test I have ever taken & that is saying something b/c I have taken quite a few standardized tests, including 2 bar exams, the MPRE, LSAT, etc. But I passed, and so can you!

I started studying about 6 weeks ago & probably put in about 125-150 hours of solid hardcore studying. The strategy I used was posted here earlier. Take the 8 exams from 2000-2003 over and over until you master all the concepts from the questions & get at least 95% correct on all the tests, which I did. I chose this strategy b/c I didn’t want to pay $$$ for the course and felt that this was the best chance to pass while investing the minimum amount of time and money. The drawback to this method, as I quickly realized during the test, is that I did not know my way around the MPEP as well as I would have liked & had to guess on several questions.

For what it is worth, I think that my final score was probably somewhere between 75-85 correct. I used the tally grid sheet as explained in an earlier post and also marked if I was confident of the correct answer (i.e. 95-99% sure I got it). I had 57 of these checked. Of the remaining 43 questions, I was usually able to narrow them down to 2 choices & then took an educated guess. So if I give myself 50% of these correct, then my total is around 57 plus 22 = 79, give or take. That’s not a bad cushion, especially if most of the questions that I had to guess were among the 10 “beta” questions that don’t count.

Of the 57 that I was confident that I had correct, about 30 were easy, verbatim straight from the 2000-2003 exams, including the door knob, moon dust eraser etc. The other 27 or so were either easy variants from the prior exams or I was lucky enough to find the answer in the MPEP.

Of the 43 that I had to guess, a bunch were about inventorship & I had no idea. I recall one question where 2 inventors signed the oath but then they get into a big fight & each said that they are the sole inventor. Then what to do? Reissue? Interference? or just file a form as per CFR # bla bla bla? I think I wasted 15 minutes looking through the MPEP to no avail. No clue & had to guess & move on. Make sure that you don’t get sidetracked when looking through the MPEP like I did. I made a few rookie mistakes costing me valuable time, mostly when it was in the PM section & I was getting tired & my mind started to wander. While searching I would sometimes catch myself reading something new in the MPEP & totally unrelated to the question & thinking “That’s an interesting rule” and then reminding myself that this is a test & I need to focus better.

Another guess was who can sign a terminal disclaimer if the rights have been assigned to several places, none of which have a majority share. After searching fruitlessly for what seemed like an eternity, I felt really stupid for not finding the answer & felt like giving up. Thank goodness I kept going.

The test writers were quite clever. They gave me the Jo & Tommy question, where the fact pattern was verbatim from the published test from 2000-2003 (I forgot which test, but this is the one with 20 claims, some were conceived by Jo & others by Tommy, then they split up or something like that etc.) After I finished reading the question carefully to make sure that there were no twists or surprises, I had the correct answer ready and thought “great, another easy one”. Surprise! They came up with new answer choices and the correct answer from the old exam was nowhere to be found. I was like the proverbial “deer in the headlights”.

Another stumper & time waster through the strange MPEP jungle was in Appeals. I think the fact pattern was that on appeal, the BPAI affirmed the rejection on some claims and rejected other claims on new ground. now what? can you immediately get a rehearing on the new ground rejection, or do you first have to deal with the examiner by amending or arguing the rejected claims that were affirmed by the BPAI? Can you do both at the same time? Who f***ing cares?

There were a bunch of 102(e) questions that I had never seen before, many dealing w/ PCT & internationall filings. Fortunately a friend told me about the timelines in the MPEP in section 700 around page 35. There are about a half a dozen or so of these timelines. This was a lifesaver b/c a few of these questions came right from those timelines. I suggest that you familiarize yourself with those timelines before taking the test.

Finally, I got the museum – titanium baseball question. Thanks to this web site, I was prepared for the variants. my question was what is the PUBLICATION date for prior art purposes? I answered the date that it is filed, indexed & catalogued (the date happened to be on July 4).

Hope this helps. Good luck!

Reply

64 MCANo Gravatar March 31, 2009 at 9:00 pm

Bulldozer,
Where do you get questions published AFTER 2003? Your mention of that got me interested.

Will appreciate any lead,

MCA

Reply

65 BulldozerNo Gravatar April 1, 2009 at 2:34 am

Sean- I’m looking to sell for around $1100. It includes everything in like new condition or a sealed wrapper.

MCA- on the top border of this page, go to the link with exam concepts and questions. several of the questions, such as titanium baseball question, lip gloss, broomstick with 974 dependent claims, foil airplane, and a bunch of PCT questions that are listed were administered after 2003. I know they were administered after 2003 because they weren’t presented in any of the tests prior!
Also see the link to EasyBarPass on the right hand column of this page, they allegedly claim that they include questions from 2006 and 2007 exams; I didn’t use them.

Reply

66 AshleyNo Gravatar April 2, 2009 at 6:14 pm

I just passed yesterday!!!!

It was very exciting and such a relief. I took the exam about a year ago and got a 68, and didn’t take it again until now because I got sucked into the craziness of law school. The first time I took the exam I studied for about 2 months using the PLI home study course and didn’t know anything about patent law. Since then I’ve taken several patent courses and worked as a patent law clerk. I started studying again around January by reviewing the PLI lectures, and then just focusing on searching the MPEP and doing the past exams over and over again until I knew then inside and out. I also read through this thread and familiarized myself with the recent questions.

I had about 40 repeats and variations including:
-Bloc/cure for cancer
-Tribell
-Japan 45 days
-103(a)/102(e)
-laminate variation (consisting/comprising)
-clock/fan
-Mario Lepieux
-assignee – hasn’t recorded ownership
-dep claim counting
-American resident/PCT in Japanese
-terminal disclaimer
-piecemeal exam
-best mode
-102 + 103 rejection (cumulative)
-which can never be P.A. under 102(a)
-reexam – which is true
-1.131 affidavit
-means for pulling door open
-cancel claims 1 & 2, allow 3
-French/Australian PCT

My morning section was much harder than the after section. The method I used was taking the questions 10 at a time, so I would make the grid for each 10 questions on a separate piece of scratch paper and try to pace myself at 30 minutes per 10 questions. I also used the * for answers I was sure were correct. In the afternoon section my computer froze and they had to move me to a new one. I freaked out a little bit because I had about 8 repeats in the first 12 questions, and I didn’t want to lose anything, but it all was fine after I got moved to a new computer. But the end I had just over 65 *’s. :)

All I know is it’s all worth it when you see that you’ve passed!!!!
Good luck everyone.

Reply

67 RPNo Gravatar April 3, 2009 at 8:44 pm

Just took & passed yesterday. I found it very helpful to look take a last minute glance at all of the “*” marked questions from old exams the day before the exam.

There were (no exaggeration) 3 questions exactly of the type of that PCT question – US/RO, published in English but no US resident/national – the countries merely switched from Germany, Sweden, & Costa Rica.

Also, I remember an unusually high number of questions relating to death of the inventor – before filing, during pendency, & after notice of allowance.

I also want to note that the search function on the MPEP in at the Prometric I was at was lightning fast compared to the pdf version on my own laptop.

Finally, as many others have recently noted, I found the second half to be much easier than the 1st.

Reply

68 Just PassedNo Gravatar April 5, 2009 at 4:46 pm

Just passed the test yesterday. As RP stated before, going over the questions marked with a “*” was very helpful. Also, know the April/October ‘03 exams. I have lots of questions on appeal. Specifically 3 questions about the BPAI making a new rejection on appeal and different scenarios on what happens when it is sent back down to the examiner. A few on reissue. 8-10 on PCT including: Japan, Costa Rica, Sweden and two figuring the 102(e) date. Also, one on inequitable conduct that I have never come across before.

Some repeats that I remember:
Tribell
Japan 45 days
Jon/John Jones (different answers given)
Bloc/ cure for cancer
Piecemeal
Multiplicity
Mirror (what would receive a rejection under 112)
Mario Lepieux
Clock/Fan/Lamp
Laminate
Process for Compound Y (150 degree vs. 300 degrees)

Just a final thought. My exam seemed to be just as tough as in the morning as it was in the afternoon. I had all my appeal questions in the afternoon as well as very obscure questions. If I think of any other questions (as I forgot some), I will post them later. Now to sell my PLI stuff!

Reply

69 John DoeNo Gravatar April 8, 2009 at 9:45 am

Passed yesterday. Thanks for everyone’s helpful comments and suggestions.

I probably had 15-20 direct old exam repeats and others that I recognized from the “new” questions listed here. Be sure to at least skim through the old questions on the exam (even though you may recognize the answers right off the bat) because a couple had different answers and/or flipped the call of the question even though the facts were the same. I saw:

Tribell
45 Days (Japan Patent no foreign license)
Cure for cancer
Piecemeal
Mario Lepieux
Clock/Fan/Lamp (dimensions)
Laminate (Variant – new call of the question)
Compound Y 150 deg.
Potter
Small Entity Status (Who can sign)
Documents Requiring Signature
Inequitable Conduct (When can examiner reject on this basis – admission/court proceeding)
Federal Court decisions binding
Able and Baker
Mr. Brick
Door handle
Moon Dust

Had a few crazy ones. They had to do with protest (filed after patent publication but before a first office action), the standard for a restriction requirement relating to combinations/subcombinations, and when an examiner can act on an amendments after appeal (something to do with Section 1210).

Good luck. As others have mentioned, it is important to rack up on as many known old exam questions as possible. With the extra time you gain you can look up those you don’t know.

Reply

70 SamNo Gravatar April 13, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Hello,

I am reviewing the Bullseye questions. Does anyone have answers to the “test bank questions”? Thanks

Also, what are your experiences with the Bullseye questions..helpful or not for the exam? How did you use these questions to study?

Reply

71 TomNo Gravatar April 13, 2009 at 8:53 pm

How useful is it to review your past exam? I took the exam last month and made 68. Wondering if I should review my exam. Thanks in advance for your help.

Reply

72 RoseNo Gravatar April 14, 2009 at 12:55 pm

Hi all,

First, I want to THANK YOU for having this site and OMG the comments that people posted were so helpful during my preparation for the patent bar (2nd time). I took my first pbar in Jan and scored 68 with PRG materials only. Then, I found this site and also bought bulleye. Their questions were very helpful (a good start) and was a quick review, also read their mini MPEP.

For my prep – I took the OCT/APR 2003 two times making sure that I knew why the answers were right/wrong…I took notes for all 200 questions and studied those subject matter in the MPEP. I looked up MPEP for every answer choices during my study, so I understand the concept and not just memorizing them. If you can score 90-95% on the 2003 exams and understand the subject matter, then that is enough. Then move on and pratice looking up answer in MPEP for those “reported new questions.” Now those are what people posted based on their memory…so to get the full benefits you should practice looking up the MPEP for each subjects (i.e. 1200 for all the appeal matters) The above method works for me…during the pbar test I knew where I can find the answer in the MPEP….knew the answer to old test questions (some of the old questions had slight variation in both call of questions and/or answer choices — see Colin/Stan above). Also, I did what Luis suggested (see LUIS posting above) about the answer sheets. I made ABCDE for all 100 questions and put check mark by the question that I knew were at least 99% right.

There were about 10-12 repeat/reported new questions in AM session and about 14 in PM session. Some of those were variation of the old test so make sure you know the materials. I had the following repeats:
Japan 45
Tommie/Jo (variation)
Mirror
Titanium baseball
Sweden PCT
102(e)/PCT dates (2-3 questions)
Ben
shoe polish
Hair gel
1.131
Obviousness
Defective PCT application
Death of inventor
Reissue (5-6 questions…I would read MPEP 1400)
Reexamination (at least 6 questions)
fax
Express mail
faxing Request for the PCT appl
147 claims
claim counting
Door handle
moon dust
Potter (variation)

Good Luck all!!! and Thanks again for this site.

Reply

73 SamiNo Gravatar April 14, 2009 at 3:07 pm

Rose,

Congrats. How much study time did you put in? What type of review did you do 1-2 days before the exam?

Reply

74 RoseNo Gravatar April 15, 2009 at 12:40 pm

Hi Sami,
For my first test, I put in a lot of time going through PRG dvd lecture and did about 300 questions from their examware. I think that was very helpful but I wasn’t fast enough during my test. That’s why it is VERY IMPORTANT that you practice taking the APR/OCT 2003 tests (2-3 times) so you will have spare time during the test for the new questions you need to look up in the MPEP.

Two days before my test, I did the APR03AM/OCT03PM then OCT03AM/APR03PM…that gave me something different to test my knowledge. Even though, I could finish all 100 questions in two hours, I basically did what Luis suggested by taking the time to turn all of the ‘ * ‘ into a check mark.

On day before my test, I practice looking up the possible answer for all of the “newly reported questions”….those questions were on the test, so make sure you know where the answer are in the MPEP.

Good Luck…it’s not too hard if you put in the time to prepare.

Reply

75 MCANo Gravatar April 16, 2009 at 8:27 pm

Hello all,

Just passed the exam today a few hours ago. I can not thank the owner of this website enough for getting me prepared. I had taken the PLI course, but the PLI course alone does not prepare you enough.

I practiced the 2002-2003 old exams at least three times (until I was scoring >95%), and 1999-2001 exams at least once. That really helped.

I also made a chart for all the questions during the first 15 minutes when the tutorial is given), and marked the questions that needed look up later. I had about 10 questions marked in the morning, and about 12 in the afternoon. I had enough time to look them up in each session, and I think I got at least 50% of them right after looking up in the MPEP.

Verbatim repeat of old questions were limited to 20 max, but 70% questions dealt with known concepts from old questions

Some questions that I encountered:
1. Tribell
2. Moondust
3.combination/subcombination (where restriction is proper)
4. Piecemeal
5. Visting attorney in Germany (file by fax)
6. filing in Japan (retroactive foreign filing license within 45 days)
7. Australian PCT (national stage entered without specifically saying that it is national stage, but the oath indicated priority to only a PCT)
8. two questions on PCT 102(e) dates calculation (both IA filed before 11/29/2000)
9. tons of questions on appeal: board affirms rejection partially and also adds its own new ground of rejection: what is the procedure?
10. questions on protest and 1.99 submission
11. ‘means for’ language modified by structure rather than function
12. non-provisional app filed without claim: answer: convert to provisional
13. when claims can be rejected for fraud (i think the answer is during reissue, if examiner comes to know of judicial etermination of fraud)
14. when can you add supplemental paper even after reply brief is filed (I think the answer is if you want to add comments on a recent case judicially determined after the filing of reply brief)
15. assignee not recoded can sign what (I think the answer is small entity status)
16. By when you can get refund for mistakenly paid large entity fee (petition within 3 months, non-extendable)
17. two questions on time calculation for extension of time after advisory action ( 2 month rule)

Hope this helps.
Good luck to all the future test-takers.

Regards,

MCA

Reply

76 Dan RNo Gravatar April 17, 2009 at 1:03 am

I passed the exam yesterday.
Thanks to this site I knew what to expect. Chaps. 700, 1200 and 2100 mostly. A mixture of old questions, questions from this site and betas.
I studied using Longacre every day for 3 months to get this stuff under my skin. There’s just too much interlinked procedure to just try to memorize discreet facts.
I suggest using the MPEP as much as possible so that you can find your way around it. This was invaluable during the exam when I had to answer tricky questions.

Reply

77 PDLNo Gravatar April 17, 2009 at 11:59 am

Wow, alot of ppl passing it recently.

Passed on my 1st try yesterday, but decided to do the writeup today because, well, beer happens.

My background: I’m a 3L at UH with several courses in patents, and 2 summers interning at various IP firms.

Although I started off with the PLI course, that thing is so old by now, that it’s not really even that useful, especially to those who have taken a basic patent law course or have worked in a patent firm for a little while. I eventually just made my own outline based off material on mypatentbar, and sat there and read the MPEP chapters that are now heavily tested (1200, 1400, 1800, 2200).

Had a total of roughly 40 repeats, with 20 coming the first half and 20 coming the 2nd half. I know this because I had an extra column in my grid system where I’d put an “R” next to the number every time I ran into a repeat. About half of those repeats were from the April, October 2003 tests, the rest were split between the newer post 2003 questions as well as some from the older ones from 2000-2001. Disclaimer: I honestly think I just got lucky with the number of repeats. On the other hand, it does show how important it is to know the old exams as well as the questions people have posted like the back of your hand. I had roughly 1 hour to do lookup on both sections of the exam to go over roughly 5-8 “tough” questions.

I used to not understand how people who have taken the test can remember so many questions from it to pass onto future test takers. Having finally done it myself, all I can say is that it will stick to you.

Here are some new questions that I remember that I don’t remember seeing on mypatentbar or patentbarquestions, and am adding to the pot.

Evil 102(e)
A practitioner files a US provisional on Oct 1, 1999. He then files an IA claiming benefit to the provisional on Oct. 1, 2000. The IA designates the US, and later publishes in English on Nov. 2001. On March 23, 2003 a practitioner files a national app under 111(a) claiming the benefit to the international app. What is the earliest 102(e) date of the national app filed under 111(a)?
Note: The question does NOT mention anything about satisfying fee oath translation requirements of 371(c)

A. March 23, 2003. For IA filed before Nov. 29, 2000. Yes, (e)(1) date: as of National App filing date; (e)(2) date: as of completing national stage requirements of 35 USC 271(1)(2)(4).

Look at Example 6 under MPEP 706.02(f)(1): Additional Priority/Benefit Claims: If a later-filed U.S. nonprovisional (35 U.S.C. 111(a)) application claimed the benefit of the IA in the example above, the 35 U.S.C. 102(e)(1) date of the application publication of the later-filed U.S. application would be the actual filing date of the later-filed U.S. application, and the 35 U.S.C. 102(e) date of the patent of the later filed U.S. application would be 01 July 2002 (the date that the earlier-filed IA fulfilled the requirements of 35 U.S.C. 371(c)(1), (2) and (4)).

I remember being super annoyed at this question because it didn’t fit the normal fact pattern, either fulfill 371(c)(1)(2)(4) or being post 20001129. The other answer choices were the provisional date, the IA filing date, the IA publication date. So very evil. I actually had this in my outline, but just freaked when I saw this on the test. Moral of story, the PTO doesn’t just ask the bright line 102(e) stuff, this one was at the bottom of the page that many ppl will just gloss over.

A facsimile using the certificate of transmission is sent out today, sometime in 2001, and is received today. Today is Friday. Which one of these would receive the benefit of the certificate of transmission.

3 answers wrong because they had to do with getting a filing date in a provisional or non-provisional.

B. a divisional filed under 1.53(b)

C. A CPA filed for a design that only meets the requirements of 1.53(d)(1)

A. A CPA can be filed by fax, but doesn’t get the benefit of a certificate of transmission. Be careful of the wording of the question. The question says that the fax is sent and received on the same day to mess you up.

Evil Appeal Question

Which of these is in accordance with proper USPTO practice and procedure?

I. Making new arguments during oral hearings for the first time.

II. Making new arguments after oral hearings for the first time, and nothing is written about it in the appeal brief.

III. Submitting arguments after oral hearings that the practitioner had previously made during prosecution

IV. Submitting new arguments after oral hearings that rely on a recent federal court decision.

Choices were, I only, II only, III only, IV only, III and IV.

I went with IV only. I don’t know whether 3 was right or wrong, but it sounded fishy, and I couldn’t find anything on it despite burning roughly 7 minutes searching.

PCT

A Japanese national who is a US resident files an IA in the US/RO. The IA is filed in Japanese. Everything else about the IA is ok (it has a request, designation, spec, claim, drawing). What will happen now?

A. The USRO will accept the IA and give him a filing date as of the date received and send it to the IB.

B. The USRO will accept the IA and give him a filing date as of the date received, and make him pay a surcharge.

C. The USRO will invite him to send in an English translation of the app within a certain amount of time, and if the applicant does so, afford him a filing date as of the date the translation is received.

Smith and Jones jointly file an IA in the US/RO. The app has the proper request, designation, spec, claim, drawing, and is in English. Later they find out that a third inventor, Figg, should be added to the IA. They fail to do so before 20 months. What is in accordance with PTO rules.

A. Enter the national stage at 30 months by paying the fee only.

B. Enter the national stage at 20 months by submitting a copy of the IA only.

C. Enter the national stage at 30 months by submitting a copy of the IA and the fee.

B. Enter the national stage at 20 months by submitting a copy of the IA and the fee.

E. Can’t remember, but not relevant.

I picked A because when the receiving office is the US, you don’t need to send in a copy of the app again, just pay the fee by 30. I think the whole bit about Figg is just a red herring, along with the 20 month deal since that was under the old PCT rules.

Should be C. Under 1810 Filing Date. An international filing date is accorded to the earliest date on which the requirements under PCT Article 11(1) were satisfied. If the requirements under PCT Article 11(1) are not satisfied as of the date of initial receipt of the international application papers, the receiving Office will invite applicant to correct the deficiency within a set time limit. See PCT Article 11(2) and PCT Rule *>20.341.50(b)41.50(b)< rejection. If the application becomes allowed, the application should not be returned to the Board.

Repeat Questions since 2003.

Mirror
PCT Sweden. Answer is A, they will still get a filing date despite the seemingly negative connotation the answer has.
PCT Germany
PCT Costa Rica
PCT ccar – “correcting obvious errors”
Japan 45 days
Death of inventor – answer is executrix.
Death of inventor – father & son but the estate is over the minimum sum required by state law for the appointment of administrator, so the answer is the executor/legal rep.
Who can sign small entity status
A bunch of 2100 obviousness MPEP lookup type questions
Divisional Reissue. The answer is D!
A reissue with an assignee of the full interest which seeks to delete one hostile inventor as well as broaden does not require the signature of the inventor being deleted.
Electric Fan/Lamp A. Applicant provided specific measurements but the prior art does not. Specifically, the was “silent” as to the dimensions.
Appeal some claims rejected other objected
Spanish Phone
Means + Function – MPEP Lookup Question
Broom – Multiplicity – The examiner should telephone the practitioner
2 month rule – The practitioner sends reply before 2 months, but the advisory action also comes before the end of 3 months. Which date to use for calculation of fee extension? A. From the end of the SSP of 3 months.

Repeat Questions 2003 and prior

2003 OCTOBER PM
6 (moondust), 13 (150 v 300), 18 (Variation of Jon Jones), 27, 28, 43
2003 OCTOBER AM
7 (bloc, cure for cancer), 9 (DRAM), 16 (Tribell), 37 (diamond grit), 44 (Japan 45 days)
2003 APRIL PM
22 (Potter), 26 (Cell Phone, no antenna)
2003 APRIL PM
30, 33 (lancer), 44
2002 OCTOBER AM
12, 34
2002 APRIL PM
2, 18
2002 APRIL AM
36
2000 APRIL AM
10, 14, 17

This just goes to show you how old some of the questions in the PTO database are, and how they refuse to discard some of them.

Conclusion: Know the old questions!

Reply

78 cyq9322No Gravatar April 18, 2009 at 2:39 pm

Does any body has any thoughts on question #2 on the post #6? What are the three things can use one signature?

Reply

79 mb345No Gravatar April 18, 2009 at 6:33 pm

Took the exam yesterday and passed. Had only a handful of repeats (moondust, tribell, bloc, Japan 45 days) in each session. Lots of obscure questions that I had to look up (even had a couple from chapters 800, 900 and 2500, which are supposedly never tested). PCT and appeals were heavily tested – I would recommend reading through those chapters to really get familiar with them. You really have to know your way around the MPEP in order to pass.

Reply

80 RoseNo Gravatar April 21, 2009 at 1:32 pm

anyone studying for CA Bar exam?

Reply

81 DPNo Gravatar April 21, 2009 at 5:06 pm

…JUST TOOK IT!

GOT 55…HAD ABOUT 7 REPEATS AND WAY TOO HEAVY ON APPEALS AND PCTs..

wished i had a few more repeats like everyone else :(

Reply

82 SarahNo Gravatar April 21, 2009 at 7:03 pm

hi DP,

Sorry to hear that. I think sometimes it depends on how lucky you are (how many repeats you get). Can you provide some details on any unusual appeal questions/MPEP sections you remember? Thank you

Reply

83 DPNo Gravatar April 21, 2009 at 8:54 pm

my repeats were pretty much the same as mp345’s exam: Tridell, Moondust, Japan (45 days answer), Bloc, few others

there was bunch of stuff on appeals (1200), I specifically remember having three different questions on what happens when BPAI either affirms, reverses, or partly affirms/reverses examiner’s rejections. I had a question about what’s happens to new matter that was not included in the appeal brief or reply brief during appeal process. also, I had a question about what happens when the examiner rejects claims second time with a new reference, is it appealable?
try to get yourself familiarize with 1200 in a heading style so that it’s easier to locate stuff during the exam.

this is all i can remember for now…wish you best of luck, now to go back to the same library and start studying for NY/NJ bar, is anyone taking it this summer?

Reply

84 mjNo Gravatar April 24, 2009 at 7:48 pm

DP,
sorry you got screwed by getting only a few repeats. maybe the testers are getting wise and are trying to limit the number of ppl passing by putting in fewer repeats?
no beating around the bush. prepping for the nj & ny bar exam, for me, was a miserable experience. every day the folks at barbri reinforced how little I knew and how much I needed to learn. but as bad as that was, I thought that the patent bar was a much more difficult exam.
My suggestion is to focus on getting as high a score as possible on the multistate exam. even though they say that the multistate is only worth 50% in nj and 40% in ny, it is apparently significantly more determinative in the final outcome because of a greater disparity in multistate scores (i.e, a greater standard deviation in multistate scores as compared to the essay scores). Then do the best you can on the essays, mpt & my multiple choice. good luck!

Reply

85 SeanNo Gravatar April 28, 2009 at 1:56 pm

I have to ask this:
What is the fundamental difference between ex parte reexamination and inter partes reexamination? What is the “hook” to recognize the difference between the two – I am not being able to identify it. Thank you in advance.

Reply

86 mjNo Gravatar April 29, 2009 at 4:52 pm

Inter partes reexam allows the 3rd party to participate in the reexam proceedings to a greater extent as compared to ex parte reexam. For ex parte reexam proceedings, the 3rd party is pretty much on the outside looking in, whereas for inter partes, the 3rd party can be more active in the proceedings. But the Inter partes procedure was created several years after the ex parte procedure. Thus, inter partes is only available for applications filed on or after Nov. 29, 1999.
So a “hook” is date specific. First check the filing date of the application. If it is before 11/29/99, then only ex parte is available. The next hook is how much the 3rd party wants to participate. So if the application was filed on or after 11/29/99, and the 3rd party wants max participation, then go with inter partes reexam.
Hope this helps.

Reply

87 SeanNo Gravatar April 29, 2009 at 5:43 pm

It does help. Thank you mj!

Reply

88 SeanNo Gravatar April 29, 2009 at 6:35 pm

I just do not understand the last sentence of the following, marked by my [ ]:

2. Improper Incorporation

>37 CFR 1.57(f) addresses corrections of incorporation by reference by inserting the material previously incorporated by reference. A noncompliant incorporation by reference statement may be corrected by an amendment. 37 CFR 1.57(f). However, the amendment must not include new matter. [Incorporating by reference material that was not incorporated by reference on filing of an application may introduce new matter.]

Reply

89 cyq9322No Gravatar April 29, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Thank you for previous post. Here is what I saw today:

Mirror (both inherent and perpendicular, but the call of the question is asking for 112 1st)
Parking meter
Ti Ball
Velcor trademark
40%XX, 40% who signs disclaimer
Issued patent, to add 2 inventors, one of original inventors does not agree, what to do
PCT amending abstract
PCT Costa Rica
PCT Sweden
Hair gel
Obvious and non-obvious questions and what overcome, quite a few
Bloc
Appeal question 1214.01, another claim objected, what will happen
Japan 45 days
102(f)
a couple 102(e) and term Qs relating to PCT
FD requirement for reissue
Fax, timely
Amendment after appeal, after brief
147 claims
moon dust
Tribell
Maintenance fee
Design 6 month
103 c
What overcome 102(a)
1.56 fraud
Assignee issue fee transmittal form
Signature requirement
Figure 5 is missing, what to do in order to observe FD, there one other question very similar
Blackwhite photo accept as drawing or not?
Court decision-claim is valid, binding or not, very tricky one?
Restriction requirement
Toothbrush
Best mode
Assignee not of record can sign
John johns

Some are not exact questions but testing the same concepts.
I found out you can opt out the 1 hr break if you want to.

Good luck to every one!

Reply

90 LTNo Gravatar May 1, 2009 at 2:44 pm

Sean,
In response to #86, the last sentence is misleading. I think what probably happened is a result of the word “may” having more than one interpretation.

1) may – allowed or permitted. (You may come in.)
2) may – a measure of possibility (If I steal, I may go to jail.)

The second definition of “may” is appropriate for your bracketed sentence. (But if you apply the first definition of “may”, it gets quite confusing.) Try replacing the word “may” with “may or may not” and see if this clarifies things.

Also try adding the following after the last sentence: “Therefore if you want to incorporate by reference, make sure its done on the original application as filed. You must be very careful about an AMENDMENT which incorporates by reference because if new matter is introduced, then you run the risk of adversely affecting your priority date.”

Good luck,

LT

Reply

91 SeanNo Gravatar May 4, 2009 at 6:36 pm

I think I understand now. Thank you LT! Why do these things have to be so convoluted. “Legal” English does not have to be difficult English.

Reply

92 PNo Gravatar May 5, 2009 at 5:07 pm

Took it today and passed. My repeats were almost identical to cyq3922″s listed above:

Mirror
Parking meter
Ti Ball
VELCRO trademark (I didn’t know this one at all)
40%XYZ, 40% ABC, who signs terminal disclaimer
Issued patent, to add 2 inventors, one of original inventors does not agree, what to do
PCT amending abstract
PCT Costa Rica
PCT Sweden
Hair gel
Obvious and non-obvious questions and what overcome, quite a few
Bloc
Appeal question 1214.01, another claim objected, what will happen
Japan 45 days
102(f)
a couple 102(e) and term Qs relating to PCT
FD requirement for reissue
Fax, timely
Amendment after appeal, after brief
147 claims
moon dust
Tribell
Maintenance fee
Design in country X
What overcome 102(a)
1.56 fraud
Assignee issue fee transmittal form
Signature requirement
Figure 5 is missing, what to do in order to observe FD, there one other question very similar
Blackwhite photo accept as drawing or not?
Court decision-claim is valid, binding or not
Restriction requirement
Toothbrush/Lancer
Best mode
Assignee not of record can sign
John johns
Tommie and Jo

Several others that escape me right now. My advice is to take the practice tests until you know them very well (a bit repetitive, but it works!). But be careful– I had a couple of questions that seemed extremely similar to past test questions that were altered in a way that changed the answer.

Also, the two sessions don’t coincide at all. I had zero PCT questions in the morning, then a slew of them in the afternoon. 706.02(f) was a life-saver, as the examples read directly on the questions.

Reply

93 SNo Gravatar May 5, 2009 at 9:39 pm

What is the answer to missing figure 5?

Reply

94 seasNo Gravatar May 6, 2009 at 12:00 am

What’s the answer for “40%XYZ, 40% ABC, who signs terminal disclaimer”?

Reply

95 seasNo Gravatar May 6, 2009 at 11:01 pm

nevermind…I figured it out. My confusion was with the post “55. luis – March 24, 2009″ where luis said:

“4) who can sign a terminal disclaimer if applicant assigned 40% to corporation A and 40% to corporation B? read the MPEP on assignments but if you are reading this 10 min before the test know that >>if the application has not assigned 100% of the rights to a single entity then it doesn’t need to cosign or is allowed to sign, therefore only the inventor/applicant can sign<<.”

But In 37 CFR 1.321 and 1490:

The terminal disclaimer, to be recorded in the Patent and Trademark Office, must:
(1)be signed:
(i)by the applicant, or
(ii)if there is an assignee of record of an undivided part interest, by the applicant and such assignee, or
(iii)if there is an assignee of record of the entire interest,
by such assignee, or
(iv)by an attorney or agent of record;

Since the question is related to a patent with divided interest, I believe only (i) and (iv) can sign terminal discliamer for this question. Thus, luis’ interpretation is incorrect.

Reply

96 luisNo Gravatar May 7, 2009 at 11:21 am

Hi there,
I guess I wrote it very fast and if you do not pay attention is confusing.
Please read the last part where I said “therefore only the inventor/applicant can sign”.

Where I say “doesn’t need to cosign or is allowed to sign” I’m refering to the corporation A and B.

Hope this helps.

Luis

Reply

97 SarahNo Gravatar May 7, 2009 at 11:51 am

So, its the inventor applicant only, not the attorney or agent?

Reply

98 SarahNo Gravatar May 7, 2009 at 2:40 pm

Hello All,

In the “exam concepts” section of this site, there are posts which say all must sign the T.D., not just (i) and (iv). Which is correct?

Thank you

Reply

99 LizzieNo Gravatar May 7, 2009 at 4:04 pm

MPEP 301:
All parties having any portion of the ownership in the patent property must act together as a composite entity in patent matters before the Office.

An assignement is the transfer of an undivided interest in the invention.

Here we have 2 assignees and the applicant, all have an undivided part interest. So I believe that either the 3 have to sign or the attorney/agent can sign (I apply here 37 CFR 1.321 (ii) or (iv)).

Reply

100 SarahNo Gravatar May 7, 2009 at 6:24 pm

Hi Lizzie,

Thanks. So, the answer is all of the above may sign.

Reply

101 LizzieNo Gravatar May 7, 2009 at 6:40 pm

Sarah,
Yes (just be careful how the question read though)

Also just as a note who does NOT have authority to sign a terminal disclaimer in a patent:
an attorney not of record in the patent

Agent or attorney of record can sign.

Reply

102 YNo Gravatar May 8, 2009 at 4:43 pm

Thanks to all contributed to this website, I passed the exam two days ago. There were at least 20 questions from 2000 -2003:

1. 10/2003 AM #16 Tribell and aroma therapy
2. 10/2003 Am #7 Bloc- cancer and pain
3. 10/2003 AM #34 Japan 45 days
4. 10/2003 AM #24 Doorknob –no variation
5. 10/2003 AM #11 variation 103 (c) exclusion same answer
6. 10/2003 AM #13 Fee not reduced for small entities
7. 10/2003 PM #4 Markush group
8. 10/2003 PM #6 moon dust
9. 10/2003 PM #19 variation answer E seems different
10. 10/2003 PM #29
11. 10/2003 PM #38
12. 4/2003 PM # 12
13. 4/2003 PM #34 may be variation
14. 4/2003 PM #44
15. 11/1999 AM #49 Best mode
16. 10/2002 AM #30 variation
17. 4/2000 AM #10 Mario Lepieux Wing cap
18. 4/200 AM #42 102(a) prior art
19. 4/2000 AM #47 reexamination
20. Convert a non-provisional to a provisional to preserve a filing date

Most other questions were reported under exam questions and concept. Here are two topics from a few I could not answer right away:
1. 37 CFR 1.99 Third-party submission in published application
2. Reasons for allowance (MPEP 1302.14)

I had many PCT questions, a few 102(e) dates, few appeals, at least 3 drawings related questions, many 103 questions, 2 combination/subcombination questions, two questions on restriction (including one combination/subcombination), and etc. Morning session was a lot harder than the afternoon session. I had only 20 minutes left to review about 10 marked questions. Questions in the afternoon were either repeats of old exam questions or reported recently tested questions. I had an hour left to look up a few of unsure answers.

Good luck to all.

Reply

103 TexPatBarNo Gravatar May 11, 2009 at 5:11 pm

Passed the test this morning! I had a very similar test as Y in the comment above me (i.e. almost all of the same repeats). Morning section was a lot harder–heavy on obscure 103 situations and maybe 5 repeats.

I had 2 different questions that addressed the same topic: Which of the following must be in a provisional app? The only two credible choices were: (1) a proper coversheet indicating that the application is a provisional application (or something like that), and (2) a spec satisfying 112 para. 1 with any necessary drawings.

I thought both were necessary, but I think (2) is the appropriate answer because it was most in line w/ the MPEP text.

Another one that stumped me was one that I initially thought was a repeat (and it might be one). It involved amendments that could be made at the time or after an appeal brief had been filed.

From 1206:

Amendments filed on or after the date of filing a brief pursuant to 37 CFR 41.37 may be admitted only to:
(A) cancel claims, where such cancellation does not affect the scope of any other pending claim in the proceeding; or

(B) rewrite dependent claims into independent form.

All the answer choices were way off except one that said “rewrite rejected dependent claims into independent form.” This injects “rejected” into the mix, which seems to imply that something is wrong with the patentability of the claim itself, and not simply an objection to it for depending on a rejected independent claim. Furthermore its a misquote of the MPEP. But none of the other choices suggested canceling claims, so I went with it.

Also one that asked what complies w/ MPEP procedure, where each choice began w/ the word “Rapidity,” its an easy textual lookup, but the answer is in 2100. The correct choice is something like the “Rapidity of the innovation w/in a field is evidence of the skill w/in that art” or something like that.

That’s all I can remember right now. I’m off to grab a nap. Good luck studying, this website is a great resource.

Reply

104 patentsandmoreNo Gravatar May 11, 2009 at 8:14 pm

Tribell and aroma therapy (what a good last question to have)
Bloc- cancer and pain
Japan 45 days
moon dust
Laurel, Abbot, and Hardy
Japan PCT
piecemeal examination
Laminate question (which is anticipated)
new ground of rejection in an appeal
enablement/written description rejection and overcoming written description
parking meter
titanium ball in museum
hair gel
1.56 fraud
DRAM
150 v. 300 melting point question
how validity or invalidity by a federal court affects how the Board interprets
Death of an inventor
Jon (John) Jones
What can assignee not of record sign?
Inventors C&D inadvertently omitted before patent issues. patent assigned to corp. by A&B. A will sign on C&D, B won’t. How to proceed?
combination/subcombination double patenting
whether a certain rejection is a statutory double patenting, nonstatutory double patenting, or just a 103(a)
Proper format of independent claim
2 112 Para 6 Means for questions (both lookups)
52 tables on CD-ROM
Hydrocyclone
Foil on airplane
Lip gloss
Broom with a lot of dependent claims.

no mirror question
no sweden or costa rica

Passed on the first try, fortunately I had a lot of repeats as stated above. I was in at 8AM, out by 2PM. I used headphones provided by Prometric to keep noise out because a lot of people were in the testing center throughout the day. The computers were new and the MPEP interface was reasonable. The answer sheet helped a lot.

Thanks Redbull, mypatentbar for the new questions plus old tests, and the patbar.com materials. Now to study for the state bar.

Reply

105 samNo Gravatar May 11, 2009 at 9:59 pm

Hi Patentsandmore,

Can you provide some more info on this question:
Inventors C&D inadvertently omitted before patent issues. patent assigned to corp. by A&B. A will sign on C&D, B won’t. How to proceed?

Do you remember answer? what section

Reply

106 patentsandmoreNo Gravatar May 12, 2009 at 12:00 am

Sam,

I believe and don’t quote me on this that the correct answer is to have file a non broadening reissue (MPEP 1412.04) because the other option(s) included corrections for pending apps and a certificate of correction answer that required the inventor that didn’t want to sign on to sign (37 CFR 1.324) which wasn’t an option. Hope that helps. Good luck!

Reply

107 seasNo Gravatar May 12, 2009 at 4:46 am

Passed today! This was my 2nd try. 1st try was back in ‘05 before i started law school. I did PLI. This time around, I re-used those materials for the audio lecture, but mainly did prior exams. I was able to recognize a lot of questions pretty fast and that helped out a lot.

I had a lot of the same repeats as Y, TexPatBar, and Patentsandmore

toothbrush on/off switch
5 steps to cross road
design patent in country x
3rd party submission – japan publication
147 claims
tommie and jo
mirror
PCT costa rica
PCT sweden
PCT germany (all 3 same questions, just different countries)
when to limit action (all of the above…too informal, multiplicity, etc.)
when legal rep not needed to sign oath for inventor? (minor can sign)
best mode
correcting address of inventor after oath filed
inventors ABC, B citizenship wrong on oath
velcro
ISA makes abstract when missing
Buzzcuts
102d – published not needed
102f
filing date requirements for provisional, non-provisional, reissue
1.56 fraud
removing benefit of priority
new rejection for appeal by board-rehearing on some, prosecution on other claims
reduction to practice when properly performed
composition xyz – app to grow hair, 100 yr old patent disclose xyz as shoe polish

Inventors C&D inadvertently omitted before patent issues. patent assigned to corp. by A&B. A will sign on C&D, B won’t. How to proceed? (MPEP 1412.04 Where an inventor is being added in a reissue application to correct inventorship in a patent, the inventor being added must sign the reissue oath or declaration together with the inventors previously designated on the patent)

Had a question i haven’t seen before…
inventors J&B invent X, but B thinks he is sole inventor & refuse to sign, J files w/o B signing oath listing J&B as inventors. what can B do? Options were along the lines of: file separate app, protest, cert of correction after issue to include B as inventor (i didn’t have a clue)

notice of allowance with patentable subject matter, but spec objected because fig. 5 missing. ex parte quayle action started. how to respond (file fig. 5; other answers suggested rce, continuation, arg against)

when is only filing an ids a proper submission with rce? (after notice of allowance)

I too got stuck on the Appeals question TexPatBar and I also selected the same answer.

Reply

108 SarahNo Gravatar May 12, 2009 at 2:23 pm

Dear Seas,
Congrats! I am taking the exam soon. Can you provide some more detail on these questions, and what the answer was if you can remember?
3rd party submission – japan publication
1.56 fraud
removing benefit of priority
Buzzcuts
inventors ABC, B citizenship wrong on oath

Thanks

Reply

109 seasNo Gravatar May 12, 2009 at 5:02 pm

3rd party submission – japan publication
- see 10.03.10p

1.56 fraud
- this question was asked “which is not true”. answer choices ranged in different topics, and answer was “There is a duty to submit information which is not material to the patentability of any existing claim.” If you look up 1.56, you will see that “There is NO duty to submit information which is not material to the patentability of any existing claim.”

Buzzcuts
- Similar to the Einstein question from a prior exams. I think i’ve seen this question referred to as “hairgel”. A gets patent on hairgel and accuses B of infringing hairgel patent. B has been selling hairgel before A filed, and B published an ad more than 1 yr of A filing. B wants to participate as much as he can, what can B do? Answer hinges on A’s filing date. Answer is ex parte reexam, can’t do inter parte because filing date does not allow inter parte.

Inventors ABC, B citizenship wrong on oath.
- Inventors A, B & C, execute oath, but B’s citizenship on the oath is incorrect. How can this be fixed? Answer is file supplemental oath with A, B & C listed as inventors, but only signed by B.

Removing benefit of Priority
- question stated that inventor wanted to extend his patent term by removing the benefit of priority to parent application. How is this done? I didn’t know how to answer this one…

I remember another question i didn’t previously list…re: MPEP 2012
- in reissue, when will statement of lack of deceptive intent in oath be challenged? “in special circumstances such as an admission or judicial determination of fraud, inequitable conduct or violation of the duty of disclosure, where no investigation need be made and the fact of the admission or judicial determination exists per se.” (answer i selected stated that examiner was aware of a judicial determination of fraud by the inventor)

good luck!

Reply

110 SarahNo Gravatar May 12, 2009 at 7:04 pm

thanks a bunch

Reply

111 BobbyNo Gravatar May 13, 2009 at 5:56 pm

Hey everybody. I just passed yesterday on my first try after studying about 75 hours and I attribute it to the PLI course, past exams, and THIS WEBSITE! There were soooo many repeat questions. I honestly went in expecting to fail (I anticipated having a lot more time to study, but was super busy at my job), but I didn’t and I really think it is because I knew the old tests and the questions and answers posted on this site. I had:
Einstein-Weissman,
5 PCT questions listed previously re German/Swedish/Mexican/ Japanese-45day/Australian-30 month,
Clock-Lamp,
40% assignee/terminal disclaimer,
5 steps to cross road,
minor legal representative,
Bloc cancer/pain
Means-plus-function language needed
nearly all the Appeals questions listed in previous posts
Moon dust
What is/is not needed for enabling
several others I can’t recall off the top of my head…

I also had 2-3 interference questions which was NOT expected and I think they are beta questions.

Another interesting question I had was when new arguments can be submitted after you file a reply brief and are awaiting a decision by the Board. They try and trick you up, but the only new argument you can submit is if there has been a new Fed case decision since filing your brief- you can use that and explain why it is relevant, that is the ONLY new argument you can make (you can either submit in paper form or argue it at a requested oral hearing)

Really, though, if you are reading this and trying to figure out how to study/how much to study:
DO
-know questions/answers posted here
-know old test questions/answers
-searches of the MPEP as PDF and experiment with unique words and phrases to find answers

DO NOT
-read the MPEP as a way to study
-if you take a course, don’t waste time on claim drafting or writing claims, etc. You can worry about that after the test, it won’t help

Good luck!!!

Reply

112 cindyNo Gravatar May 14, 2009 at 3:38 pm

Hi Bobby,
Congratulations on your pass.
Can you please provide more information on the interesting question about the new argument? I searched “new argument” in 1200. However nothing came out as what you said.
Thanks.

Reply

113 BobbyNo Gravatar May 14, 2009 at 7:24 pm

Hey Cindy,

Below is MPEP 1209/Rule 41.47- look under (e)(1) and (e)(2) which basically says you can only use new arguments based on recent Board decisions or Fed decisions. There is another part somewhere that says pretty much the same thing for written form (as opposed to oral hearing). If you get that question, this is the ONLY thing “new arguments” can be based on. Hope that helps.

1209 Oral Hearing
**>

37 CFR 41.47 Oral hearing.

(a) An oral hearing should be requested only in those circumstances in which appellant considers such a hearing necessary or desirable for a proper presentation of the appeal. An appeal decided on the briefs without an oral hearing will receive the same consideration by the Board as appeals decided after an oral hearing.

(b) If appellant desires an oral hearing, appellant must file, as a separate paper captioned “REQUEST FOR ORAL HEARING,” a written request for such hearing accompanied by the fee set forth in § 41.20(b)(3) within two months from the date of the examiner’s answer or supplemental examiner’s answer.

(c) If no request and fee for oral hearing have been timely filed by appellant as required by paragraph (b) of this section, the appeal will be assigned for consideration and decision on the briefs without an oral hearing.

(d) If appellant has complied with all the requirements of paragraph (b) of this section, a date for the oral hearing will be set, and due notice thereof given to appellant. If an oral hearing is held, an oral argument may be presented by, or on behalf of, the primary examiner if considered desirable by either the primary examiner or the Board. A hearing will be held as stated in the notice, and oral argument will ordinarily be limited to twenty minutes for appellant and fifteen minutes for the primary examiner unless otherwise ordered.

(e)

(1) Appellant will argue first and may reserve time for rebuttal. At the oral hearing, appellant may only rely on evidence that has been previously entered and considered by the primary examiner and present argument that has been relied upon in the brief or reply brief except as permitted by paragraph (e)(2) of this section. The primary examiner may only rely on argument and evidence relied upon in an answer or a supplemental answer except as permitted by paragraph (e)(2) of this section.

(2) Upon a showing of good cause, appellant and/or the primary examiner may rely on a new argument based upon a recent relevant decision of either the Board or a Federal Court.

Reply

114 cindyNo Gravatar May 15, 2009 at 9:22 am

Thank you so much Bobby.

This really helped a lot.

Reply

115 tinaNo Gravatar May 17, 2009 at 11:04 pm

This site is amazing!! Thanks soo much for putting this all together. Patent bar courses are outrageously priced and all the material on this site is more than sufficient to pass the bar. Thanks!!

Reply

116 SamNo Gravatar May 18, 2009 at 6:48 pm

Is anybody planning on taking the exam towards the end of June?

Reply

117 guptroopNo Gravatar May 19, 2009 at 6:26 pm

I took the exam on Monday, May 18 in Bedford, Texas, and passed! I took the PLI live course in January, and did practice questions they provided for a few months. Then, about a month before the exam, I began doing practice exams from 2002-2003. This site was also a huge help in the final weeks, especially the repeat questions. I had several repeat questions (described in detail below, though not complete–sorry, can’t remember them all).

I had several questions on the PCT and 102(e). A quick word on this: these topics are complicated, but the questions I had on them were very manageable. The essence of the PCT questions dealt with how to get a filing date and whether the USPTO could serve as a Receiving Office (RO/US — I always think of Princess Bride). For 102(e) know that there is a difference between pre- and post-Nov. 29, 2000 filings.

I also had a few questions on what can/can’t be faxed; third party submissions; and re-examination. The questions that drew my attention were directed to the filing of drawings. For example, if you file an app on Jan 4 without drawings, but with a complete spec and claims, and the PTO determines you need drawings, what is the filing date? I had an idea on this, but am not sure it’s correct.

Repeat questions:
Laurel, Abbot and Hardy
Smith Laminate
Bloc
Smith DRAM
Prior art (4.00.42a)
Copper Substrate
Tribell
Reexam (10.03.6c)
Mr. Brick
Beck melting point.

If I think of more, I will repost. Best of luck studying. I agree with what folks have said on this site. Do practice problems, especially from the 2002-2003 exams. Know the repeat questions (fyi, the only reason I finished in time is because I knew the repeats). Don’t panic!

Reply

118 AshwiniNo Gravatar June 24, 2009 at 9:40 am

Hi guptroop,

Congrats on passing the exam! Do you still have your PLI materials and are you looking at selling those?? I am looking at purchasing a used bar review course.

Thanks,

Reply

119 guptroopNo Gravatar May 19, 2009 at 6:28 pm

Just remembered: Moon dust and Japanese 45 days.

Reply

120 guptroopNo Gravatar May 19, 2009 at 6:36 pm

Sorry — also had:
Hydrocylone
52 tables CD-ROM
Jon (John) Jones
Piecemeal Examination

Reply

121 Thank youNo Gravatar May 19, 2009 at 7:17 pm

GUPTROOP-
could you please give me more information on 52tables CD-Rom? If tables are more than 51 pages does it have to be on a CD?

Thank you in advance!

Reply

122 Thank youNo Gravatar May 19, 2009 at 10:04 pm

Inventors C&D inadvertently omitted before patent issues. patent assigned to corp. by A&B. A will sign on C&D, B won’t. How to proceed?

wut is the answer to this?

thank you :)

Reply

123 guptroopNo Gravatar May 20, 2009 at 9:46 am

Re: Thank you — May 19, 2009:

1. The 52 tables question has to do with submissions to the PTO on CD-ROM. It’s actually a trick question. I believe the facts indicate that there are 52 tables, each taking up 1/2 a page. The pertinent section of MPEP is 608.05.

MPEP 608.05: “A single table contained on 51 pages or more, or if there are multiple tables in an application and the total number of pages of the tables exceeds one hundred pages, the tables may be submitted on a CDROM or CD-R (in compliance with 37 CFR 1.52(e) and 37 CFR 1.58).”

Reply

124 Tim LooseNo Gravatar May 21, 2009 at 6:19 pm

Took the exam today (third try :( ) and passed.

One tip: I reread the 2003 exams the night before and in the morning. I then scanned ALL the questions first to see if any were repeats, and answered them first. I think this helped.

Again, the PM session went quicker than the AM session. I had 45 minutes to look up answers, while in the AM it was 20 min or so.

Reply

125 SamNo Gravatar May 21, 2009 at 7:14 pm

Hello Tim

Congrats! Do you remember any unusual questions or some topics you did not expect? Thanks

Reply

126 Tim LooseNo Gravatar May 21, 2009 at 8:06 pm

Not really – the worst were the questions like “which of these (five) is not in accord with USPTO procedures?”, and they all come from different MPEP chapters.

I think having a good command of the MPEP organization is the most important factor.

Reply

127 MohammadNo Gravatar May 21, 2009 at 11:00 pm

Hi All,

I passed the test today on my first try. I did the PLI course and did most of what others have recommended (old exams, and “new” questions on this site and patentbarquestions.com). I was surprised by how many repeats (about 60%). I was able to look up perhaps a handful of question on the MPEP, it was not very convenient. Some of the repeats were verbatim, but most had some changes in them.
These are some of what I can remember:

Tribell
Mirror
Moondust
Jon Jones (file ADS to correct)
Smith & Jones (cell phone with no antenna)
Bloc (cure for cancer/pain reliever)
2 PCT, almost identical pre 11/29/2000, 102(e) date (both when oath was filed)
PCT with priority to non-provisional and provisional asking for when patent term starts (filing date of NPA).
PCT with Swedish applicant (filing date granted, sent to IB)
PCT with Costa Rica applicant (filing date granted, sent to IB)
Non-provisional filed without claim, how to keep the filing date (convert to Provisional).
How to make sure company xyz is owner on the patent (fee transmittal)
A couple of fax questions
A couple of certificate of mailing questions
A couple of USPS Express mail questions
Museum Ti ball (prior art date is when indexed, I think)
2 almost identical questions on new ground of rejection by BPAI
2 almost identical questions about a few claims rejected and a few allowed after appeal, what happens next?
Appeal brief is not filed, what happens (appeal ends but the app goes back to examiner).
When can RCE be filed with just IDS for submission? (I think after allowance, but not sure)
App is filed by A and B, but B thinks he should be the sole inventor, what can he do (I think file his own app and request interference)
A tough question on 102(f), mostly look up from 2100. What are the invention concepts of 102(f).
Several questions on 102(e), 102(a) with familiar fact patterns to identify how to overcome the rejections
2 or 3 questions on 103 obviousness (hard ones)
Restriction requirement and how examiner decides on restriction.
What can an assignee not of record sign? (small entity)
Inventor assigns part of patent to practitioner, then dies, what then? (I think practitioner can continue prosecution).
Claim counting (still 147!).
How to correct citizenship of inventor (new oath/declaration, I think).
How to correct the address (ADS, I think).
Something about fraud and what examiner does, but I don’t remember the details.
103(c) exception (applied to 102efg prior art applied to 103(a) rejections)
How to argue for utility aspect of 112?
Hair growth remedy and old shoe polish product (claim a method of hair growth).
Electric toothbrush (claim power source or something like that).
Double patenting question (distinguish between statutory, judicial, and provisional double patenting & 102(e)).
Application lost at USPTO, how to prove it was sent? (post card from PTO with details, I think)
Nonpublication and Japan filing (45 days to report).
Fig. 5 missing from filed app, how to not lose provisional filing date priority (send it by USPS Express mail).
A few reexam or reexam-related questions (know only patents and printed pubs can be used, also inter-parte after Nov. 29, 1999, reexam can be filed up to 6 years after patent expires, practitioner can file on behalf of unnamed 3rd party, and so forth).
Terminal disclaimer when 40%, 40% assignees plus applicant (I think all 3 must sign together).
Piecemeal exam (all 4 conditions provided, just select all),
PCT app filed with errors (have 30 days to fix)
Means+function question, door knob and handle versus reference (just replace the claim with the actual structure).
ISA edits the abstract in PCT app, you are not happy with it. What to do (you have 30 days to comment on it, after ISA report).
Reissue app filed to claim forgotten foreign priority, what is needed?
Maintenance fee returned, how to send it back properly and what petition to file?
Asking about competitor’s app which is not published, what can you get from PTO (probably nothing).
How to cancel claim of foreign priority to increase patent term (amend the spec).

Good luck

Reply

128 AshNo Gravatar May 28, 2009 at 1:50 pm

Agree with Mohamad’s statements. Had at least about 40% repeats. My recommendation is to review every exam till 2000.

Reply

129 DanNo Gravatar May 28, 2009 at 2:28 pm

Hi Ash,

Wow that many repeats? Did you see any new questions? I am scheduled to take the test in mid July; what are your tips?

Reply

130 cindyNo Gravatar May 28, 2009 at 4:21 pm

Means or step plus function claims (35 USC 112 6th paragragh)
Even after reading the corresponding part in chapter 2100, I am still very confused. Can someone give me some old test exam questions to help me to understand the concept? Thank you in advance.

Reply

131 newbeeNo Gravatar May 29, 2009 at 1:45 pm

A basic qs: CPA practice is applicable for design (and not plant and utility applicns) only from which date: is it may 29 2000 or is it July 14 2003. I am very confused with this one- all the prev tests I have taken inform about the former date while MPEP 201.06(d) clearly states otherwise. Please help- I am taking the exam next week. Thank you in advance

Reply

132 DYNo Gravatar May 29, 2009 at 2:45 pm

Hi,

The following document from the USPTO would seem to support the 7/14/03 date:

http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/68fr32376.pdf

See ‘Elimination of Continued Prosecution Application Practice as to Utility and Plant Patent Applications’…

Hope this helps… I am afraid this is hardly the first item where there would appear to be inconsistencies between dates as enumerated in different parts of the MPEP…

Reply

133 DanNo Gravatar May 29, 2009 at 2:53 pm

Section 201.06 also mentions a June 1995 date?

Reply

134 AshNo Gravatar May 29, 2009 at 9:27 pm

Dan,
I cant think of any new questions at the top of my head. The test center prevents you from noting down questions. My advise is to go over all the exam question, but delve deep into each answer and understand the possibilities. If you can supplement that with this site, you should be good to go.

Reply

135 cindyNo Gravatar May 31, 2009 at 9:47 am

I just found something interesting while doing question #19 (October 15, 2003, afternoon exam). I tried to find “mechanical equivalents” from MPEP chapter 2100 (using the find function in adobe acrobat 5)since it’s te exact phrase from answer E. Nothing came out. But it’s actually in 2144.06 (II). However the two words are not in the same line. It was broken into two lines. Has anyone seen anything similar?

The search function in the higher version of adobe can find the exact phase without any problem.

Reply

136 newbeeNo Gravatar May 31, 2009 at 10:48 am

cindy,
You’re right about that- I found the same too- only mechanical search instead of mechanical equivalent worked.

Reply

137 newbeeNo Gravatar May 31, 2009 at 10:49 am

I tried a few other search words where the sentence was staggered in two lines and it does not work unless it is in the same line

Reply

138 newbeeNo Gravatar May 31, 2009 at 4:52 pm

I have downloaded the recent version of MPEP rev.6 2007 (from USPTO website) and see a major discrepancy from the version I was used to in the PLI patware (2005). Chpt 2100: secn 2141: Basic factual inquiries of Graham vs. Deere: there were 4 mentioned in the MPEP: scope and content of prior art, diff in prior art and claim, level of skill, evidence of 2ndry considern. In this one, only 3 are mentioned of which 1st and 2nd are repeats i.e.diff in prior art and claim. Am I missing something? Aren’t there 4 basis for factual enquiries

Reply

139 newbeeNo Gravatar May 31, 2009 at 4:54 pm

Also a few qs:
1. A nonenabling ref may qualify as prior art for obviousness under 103- does this mean that a ref which doesn’t have enabling disclosure (attempts to make composn were unsuccesful bfore the date of invn) qualifies as prior art under 103?
2. Also, are only 102(b), (c) and (d) statutory bars? why?

Reply

140 RoyNo Gravatar May 31, 2009 at 5:15 pm

To answer 118, Thankyou- I got the same question: Inventors C&D left out of patent issued to 100% Assignee. Inventor A agrees but inventor B disagrees. Action choice: I chose the one where assignee could file a reissue (from fact pattern) without A&B consent.

PCT- I got all the recently reported new questions.
Swedish – a variation- forward to IB may no longer be correct choice. Instead, choice that includes phrase (USA)’not competent site’ may be most correct.
PCT- Q changed but similar fact pattern 10.03.#14PM;#15PM.
PCT- Abstract- ‘30 day reply’.

The following are questions from Oct 03 exams. I am following this sites format except for underlining Q I say #Q. Followed byAM/PM.
Claim counting – Ans 147 10.03.#50AM.
Japan – Ans 45days10.03.#44AM.
Tribell- 10.03.#16AM
Step for crossing- 10.03.#23.AM.
Door Handle- 10.03.#24.AM.
RCE- variation -10.03.#36.AM.
Action after 2x rejection – 2Q 10.03.#42.AM.
1)same
2)variation
Appeal- 10.03.#38AM and read MPEP 1214.06 Examiner sustained in whole or part and expect to be heavily tested on this concept.
Bloc- 10.03.#7.AM
102d- 10.03.#8.AM
Claim- 10.03.#10;#47AM
Enablement- 10.03.#18AM
Publication as References-10.03.#29AM – Choose ‘July4th’ in phrase
10.03#46AM
Abandoned-10.03.#46AM
Search- many variations- 10.03.#4PM
Moondust- 10.03.#6PM
Anticipation- 10.03.#7PM variation
102g- 10.03.#8 variation
TP submission-answer-Sole Japanese Publication-10.03.#10PM
103 obviousness- variation but same concepts-10.03#16PM
Jon Jones Design variation- choice (c) not there-10.03.#18PM
Reply to nonfinal office action variation- 10.03.#21PM
Oath/ADS and address/citizenship-10.03.#22PM;#43PM
Parking meter-10.03.#28PM
Design 102d-10.03.#29PM
Smith & Jones vs Bell & Watson cell phone 10.03.#30PM
Certificate of mailing and foreign country concept-10.03.#34
XYZ assignee and divisional concept-10.03.#38PM
Prima Facie concepts drawn similar to 10.03.#33PM
And also read MPEP 2142 ‘…Basic Criteria’.

Reply

141 greenhornNo Gravatar June 1, 2009 at 11:20 pm

i passed! 2nd try.

Scored a 63 on the 1st try after paying nearly $3K for the prep class. I won’t say which one.

This time I changed my test prep strategy. I spent whatever time I had to study on the past exams until I knew every question. Also used this web site. That’s it. I got about 60% repeats from the old tests plus several others from this web site. My test sounds like it easily could have been the same test as Mohammad and Roy. My 2nd test was similar to my 1st test, only this time it was soooo much easier (because I already knew the answers to over 70% of the questions — duh!).

Thank you to all who contributed to this web site. You had a hand in helping me to pass!

Reply

142 YuriNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 12:21 am

Greenhorn:

Congrads. Did you do any exams prior to 2002? And if you did, would you suggest doing them or not. Also did many of the repeats have variations from the old exams or what majority were verbatim.

Thanks

Reply

143 SamNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 11:33 am

Roy,

What was the answer to the John/Jon variation you saw? (how to correct a typo in inventor’s name). If not answer C, the only other thing I can think of is to file a supple ADS? Please advise

Thanks in advance

Reply

144 YuriNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 11:59 am

Sam,

If you re referring to the spelling question, the answer is to contact the PTO by letter.

Yuri

Reply

145 SamNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 12:22 pm

Yes it is this one Yuri. But ROy says he saw the variation. Is this the answer to the variation?

Reply

146 greenhornNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 12:54 pm

Yuri,

I went back to the 2000 exams & knew all the questions inside and out. Yes, there were a a bunch of questions from the 2000 and 2001 exams. So I would suggest going back to 2000.

I know that learning more exams is not fun, but if you already did the 2002 and 2003 exams, then it will not be as difficult for you to do 2000 and 2001 because there are some questions from 2000 and 2001 that were repeated in 2002 and 2003. So you already did those questions. Plus you are already familiar with the general concepts so you should have an easier time with the 2000 and 2001 exams.

I wrote down the information of exactly how many repeats were verbatim or variations on scrap paper, but they made me turn everything in before I left. I was not going to risk trying to smuggle it out, especially after passing the test. So this is just from memory. About 2/3 repeats were verbatim, maybe 1/3 were variants. Many variants were of the type where the question was verbatim but the answer choices were different. That is still an advantage because at least I did not need to waste any time and energy just trying to understand the question, unlike my first time around.

I also suggest knowing the post-2003 exam questions from this web site. I think that I had about 15-20 of these on my test.

What an advantage for me the 2nd time around. The 1st time, I prepared by mainly focusing on what the course taught but did not know the old exams inside and out. Plus I was not aware of this blog. I was fairly sure that I did not pass the test before I hit the “exit” button.

I used the wrong strategy for passing the test. This time around, I had already seen and studied about 80 of my test questions beforehand and instantly knew the answers to most of them. I don’t mean to boast or brag, but I knew that I passed the test with about 10 questions remaining.

Good luck.

Reply

147 bcphungNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 5:31 pm

Dear All:

Did someone know the answer of the question of Combination/ Subcombination ?

Thanks a lot
BC

Reply

148 RoyNo Gravatar June 2, 2009 at 5:53 pm

Sam
To answer your Jon Jones/ADS question (137/139 entry):
I got a variation answer choice as I said above. The incorrect choices appeared similar to those in the original. So, you definitely want to look at the explanations in this 2003 question to know what is incorrect. I apologize – I can’t remember the exact answer.
Good luck!
Roy

Reply

149 dcNo Gravatar June 3, 2009 at 10:17 pm

Hi All,

I am happy to have stumbled upon this site. I’ve been studying by myself for the past couple of months and using the outline from freepatentbar.com and the materials from bullseye.

i’m able to get about 95% right on the four 2002&2003 tests consistently but i didnt really use the MPEP at all while i’ve been taking the practice tests.

i’ve been reading over the right and wrong answers and generally understand what the question is about but just haven’t been using the MPEP.

am i screwing myself? anyone have any advice for me on how to learn how to use the MPEP as fast/as best as possible?

i’ve downloaded acrobat 5.0 and MPEP Version 8 Revision 4 and its one long PDF file. When you actually take the patent bar is it the same? i.e., do i search the WHOLE MPEP at once or do i have to search by chapter?

If i have to search by chapter, am i just supposed to “figure” out what chapter each question is supposed to be in?

i’m a bit confused about how to exactly use the MPEP. any advice would be most appreciated.

Thanks!

Reply

150 DYNo Gravatar June 4, 2009 at 1:20 am

Hi dc…

I do think it is pretty important that you learn to navigate through the MPEP during the test… In spite of all the tests you are taking, there will be questions that you won’t know the answer to, and so it is important that you figure out where to look (i.e., questions on elements of a patent, Chapter 600; questions on elements of prosecution, Chapter 700, and patentability, Chapter 2100)…

So yes, in time, you will be able to figure out which chapter to look for… If you can’t, you can always look at the index (which is important for you to learn to navigate)…

One more thing: it seems to me that you have downloaded the full MPEP, which is a monster… You should get used to looking to it in Chapter chunks; it makes for a much more manageable search…

Hope this helps!!!

Reply

151 DPSNo Gravatar October 12, 2010 at 4:42 am

Does anyone have the freepatentbar.com study outline or know where to find it? it doesn’t seem to be on their site anymore.

if you have it pls send to patentbar@me.com

Reply

152 DYNo Gravatar June 4, 2009 at 1:07 am

Well,

I took my test today, and I passed… I thought I’d add a few comments to what has been already posted, as my approach to the test might have been slightly different…

With a very busy job at a High Tech startup, and a 2-year-old daughter, my time to study has been extremely reduced… So I took about 15 months, from the time I started studying until today… I purchased a used copy of the PLI course, and listened to all the tapes about 10 times each (this is no joke, by now I can recite those tapes by memory!!!)… I also went through of couple of ultra-high-intensity periods at work where I could hardly study anything… But the effect all this had was to enable me to digest the MPEP in a fairly meticulous way…

Once I was done with the core material, I started working on available tests, which I believe is the absolute best way to truly master the relevant concepts (not to mention the added bonus of having at least 20-25 repeat questions show up in the test)… I don’t know that there is much sense in listing them, as many posts have done it before: the PCT filing in the USPTO with a citizen from Costa Rica (irrelevant, as long as there is at least one US Citizen/Resident); the two flavors of the PCT filing claiming priority from a German patent filed before and after 11/29/00 (before, 102(e) date is when declaration shows up; after, THERE IS NO 102(e) date on applications that stem from PCT filings not in Engish); other questions will come to me once my brain awakes from the taking of the test…

So this is what I recommend:

- Try taking as many tests as possible, in timed three-hour sits; you need to get used to the timing stress (if at all possible, I would suggest a full-day session with two three-hour sits). After you take the tests, carefully review them (at least the questions you get wrong) and make very, very sure you understand why you got them wrong…

- Try running your tests on the very oldest version of Acrobat Reader, because you will not get the cludgy interface in the newer versions…

- A previous post recommended reviewing during the break between tests; I tried doing that, but my head was about to explode, and so I just used the remaining of the time to relax and regroup…

Good luck to everybody who will take the test, and congratulations on those who have passed it!!!

Reply

153 newbeeNo Gravatar June 4, 2009 at 1:44 am

Hey all, I just took the exam and passed!! Am very glad that I passed on the first try esp since I come from a non-law background. I have a Ph.D in molecular and cell biol and post doc in biomed sciences. This site helped me a lot.
Basically I worked on home study guide from PLI and took lots of exam from the patware as well as exams from 2000 to 2003. Take the exams till you get 100% and understand the concepts. Work on the exams with MPEP, use acrobat reader 5 version.
I did not get many repeats from old exam in my first session( maybe 10) and a few variants. Also some qs that are posted by the prev exam takers. Make sure you know where to look them up in MPEP- many qs have 2 ans which are very close and you cannot tell the right ans till you refer to the MPEP. I finished both my sessions in the first hour and spent the remaining two hours checking ans from MPEP. In the first session, I was iffy about 3-4 ans but had found ans to the others verbatim from MPEP. In the second session, other than the mirror qs (I ain’t sure if my ans was correct),I think I got all the others right. So mastering the MPEP in terms of looking it up and also the right combn of knowledge and past exams help to pass! Good Luck all the exam takers, congrats to all who passed and thank you for this wonderful site

Reply

154 SamNo Gravatar June 4, 2009 at 3:27 pm

Newbee Congrats!!

Do you remember any unusual strange questions from your exam?? Thank you

Reply

155 YuriNo Gravatar June 4, 2009 at 9:17 pm

Just got home!

Passed on my first try. I took the PLI home study course. Did all the exams that were on Patware at least 2 times. Did a few more of the older exams that are not on Patware. And reviewed all the repeat questions pointed out on this site. My biggest problem was using the funky acrobat that they have and the fact that the resolution on the monitors is much lower, so you are stuck scrolling quite a bit. As such, I found myself using the MPEP less than when I did the practice exams. In the end, know the basic materials that keep coming up in every exam, review the repeats pointed out here, and know how to search the MPEP.

Reply

156 JuanNo Gravatar June 5, 2009 at 9:22 am

I took the test yesterday and passed…

If anyone is interested in the PLI materials selling them dirty cheap.

Thanks to this cite I was able to get my thoughts straight when studying. It was a big help.

Reply

157 DonaldNo Gravatar June 6, 2009 at 12:12 am

Is it a goof course?
How much does it cost. I may be in terested in buying it. Is your the home study version one?

Reply

158 AshwiniNo Gravatar June 17, 2009 at 11:41 pm

Hi Juan,

Congrats on passing the Exam! Is your PLI material still available for sale? I am very interested as I’m just begining to study for the pat bar. The current material test is the MPEP version 8 rev. 4, i think. Is this what u were tested on? Looking forward to your reply.

Thanks.

Reply

159 newbeeNo Gravatar June 5, 2009 at 12:40 pm

Sam, there weren’t any qs which were obscure- however was heavily tested on appeal, PCT, restriction- when is restriction proper. Know those chpt really well. Other than that there were atleast 4-5 qs fro 200 and 100. Can’t remember the exact content of the qs though. However I could easily find the ans from MPEP. They were verbatim. If you have PLI patware, use the customised exam option and take tests on above mentioned chpt- will help you familiarize with these chpts. Also, while taking the exam, minimize the MPEP window with your mouse dragging on the edges- that way you can compare key words directly from the exam.
Also, anyone interested in PLI materials?
Thanks

Reply

160 JayNo Gravatar June 5, 2009 at 6:54 pm

Hi Newbie… Congrats on passing! I plan to take the exam at the end of summer and would be interested in the used copy of PLI, let me know if you still have it.

Reply

161 newbeeNo Gravatar June 8, 2009 at 3:00 pm

Sure Jay, Email me at sheelk@hotmail.com and I’ll give you the details. In addition I can give you my notes- from chpt 700 and 2100 which you ought to know cold.

162 DonaldNo Gravatar June 6, 2009 at 12:10 am

I’m looking for a PBE review course any sugesstion? I saw the cheap one Omniprep ($500, I think it stinks though- no teaching just a bunch of ols tests for you to do 2000-2003).
Anyone know anything about PES system (from Colorado)? It’s pretty cheap too ($650). But is it good? should I buy it?
ANyone have any experience with a good course please help.
Thanks

Reply

163 cindyNo Gravatar June 6, 2009 at 9:26 am

Newbie,
Congratulations on your pass! Did you run into the situation that two words that you searched were staggered in two lines?
I am thinking to take the exame in August. I am using the PLI and Bullseye material. My study stratergy is I read the outline of each chapter; then i start working on questions that relate to those chapters (Bullseye has a pdf doc with grouped questions by chpater). I am at chpater 2100 right now. What is your suggestion for my last two months’ preparation?
Thank you so much.

Reply

164 DonaldNo Gravatar June 6, 2009 at 11:15 am

Hi Cindy:
I am just curious about Bullseye materials. Is it any good in term of explaining MPEP? My strategy is to find something to learn and understand the MPEP then take a lot of old exams.

Thanks for reading

Reply

165 JuanNo Gravatar June 6, 2009 at 12:58 pm

Donald,

I took it studying with PLI, trying to get rid of mine for cheap.

email me at Jarias5121@aol.com, if you are interested.

Reply

166 cindyNo Gravatar June 7, 2009 at 8:25 am

I think it’s pretty nice. It supplements PLI. It also contains a question bank with most asked questions at prometric.

Reply

167 cindyNo Gravatar June 7, 2009 at 9:56 am

I have a question about question #8, Oct 16, 2002, pm

8. An application includes independent claims 1 and 2. Which of the following, in a reply to a non-final Office Action, provides the proper basis for a rejection under 35 USC 112 (1)?

(B)Applicant amends claim 1 of the originally filed application by adding a limitation that was written in the original disclosure of the application, but the original disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make or use the invention as claimed in amended claim 1.

(C) Applicant amends and broaden claim 2 by removing a limitation which was written in the original disclosure of the application, and one of ordinary skill in the art is enabled by the original disclosure to make and use the invention as claimed in amended claim 2.

The answer said the correct answer is B. C is not correct because the original disclosure enables claim 2.

But if we look at C, it removed a limitation which was written in the original disclosure. Doesn’t it trigger the written description rejection of 35 USC 112 (1)?

Reply

168 cindyNo Gravatar June 7, 2009 at 10:56 am

Following up my preceding post:
MPEP 2163.05 Changes to the Scope of Claims
I Broadening Claim
Omission of a limitation

“Under certain circumstances, omission of a lmitation can raise an issue regarding whether the inventor had possession of a broader, more generic invention.”

“A claim that omits an element which applicant describes as an essential or critical feature of the invention originally disclosed does not comply with the written description requirement.”

In this sense, (C) very likely does not comply with the written description requirement if the limitation it removed is an essential/critical feature.

Written description and enablement requirement are independent from each other. They can be the basis for a rejection under 35 USC 112(1) respectively.

Reply

169 newbeeNo Gravatar June 8, 2009 at 3:06 pm

Cindy,
that’s a good strategy of studying. For the next two months after you are done with your chapterr revisions, concentrate on prev exams in addition to customized exams from PLI software.
Also, I did not encounter the problem of words staggerd in two lines. The strategy i used for searching was to go to the particular section in MPEP and then search for the words- this becomes easy to find rather than going thro’ the whole chpt- esp 700, 2100 and 1800 since they are big chpts.
Good Luck!!

Reply

170 newbeeNo Gravatar June 8, 2009 at 3:08 pm

Anyone aware of good websites to look for jobs in Law Firms? I have come across a few on the net but any inputs will be appreciated.
Thanks

Reply

171 RolfNo Gravatar June 8, 2009 at 3:42 pm

Hi Newbee,
Not sure what you are looking for, but
http://www.indeed.com
is a very good, daily site for all US Patent Agent / Patent Lawyer jobs, compiled from different sources, i.e. newspapers, postings, other web sites, etc., easy to check what is new, every day, comes automatically to your mailbox.

Good luck with your search,
Rolf

Reply

172 DanNo Gravatar June 9, 2009 at 3:56 pm

Just took the exam today and failed it by 3 q’s. I think I am mastering the exams from 00 to 03. The failed rate is less then 5%. I don’t understand what went wrong.

It seems that I need to change the study material. Been using omniprep – which has so many holes.

Is anyone interested in selling their PLI books and software? It just doesn’t make any sense to go through the whole course… and I think the books will do the job.

Reply

173 Administration TeamNo Gravatar September 15, 2009 at 11:31 am

Omni Learning Corporation, the publisher of OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course, strongly disagrees with this negative comment about our course. Our goal is to produce the highest quality patent bar course to ensure that our students achieve success on their USPTO exam. Because we are confident about the quality of our course, OmniPrep offers the best money back guarantee in the industry. Since our students’ success is our priority, we are extremely diligent about addressing all student questions and concerns. Given that 98% of our students pass the patent bar exam, we question whether this comment is real, or more likely, a false statement posted by a competitor. If this is a real complaint we ask the poster to please contact our Administration Department at: admin (AT) omnipreppatent (DOT) com, so that we can resolve the problem.

Thank you.

Administration Team
OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course
Omni Learning Corporation

Reply

174 SamNo Gravatar June 9, 2009 at 6:19 pm

Dear Dan,

Sorry to hear that. How did you study for the exam? were you an expert searcher with the MPEP? How many hours did you study?

What do you mean the fail rate is less than 5%?

Sam

Reply

175 DanNo Gravatar June 9, 2009 at 7:16 pm

Sam,

I took an online course with omniprep… not good at all. I am expert on searching MPEP… I did about 2 hours 5 times a week for about 5 months… and failed it the first time. In my opinion, the prep material was not good, and I had no direction on what I need to know for the exam.

Then, I studied for two months about 5-6 hours every day. I master all 2000 to 2003 questions – 5% fail rate. And with all this I was expecting a 80% pass rate, but I got only 66%.

Time, effort and prep material is not enough if you don’t get the right stuff to study from. This website has a lot of confusing material. It tells you what the new questions where encountered, but many explanations are very confusing and not helpful to prepare for the actual exam.

Dan

Reply

176 Administration TeamNo Gravatar September 15, 2009 at 11:28 am

Omni Learning Corporation, the publisher of OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course, strongly disagrees with the above comment. Our mission is to produce the highest quality patent bar course to ensure that our students achieve success on their USPTO exam. Because we are confident about the quality of our course, OmniPrep offers the best money back guarantee in the industry. Since our students’ success is our priority, we are extremely diligent about addressing all student questions and concerns. Given that 98% of our students pass the patent bar exam, we question whether these comments are real complaints, or more likely, false statements posted by a competitor. If these are real complaints, or if you have any questions regarding our course, please contact our Administration Department at: admin (AT) omnipreppatent (DOT) com.

Thank you.

Administration Team
OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course
Omni Learning Corporation

Reply

177 Sad in CANo Gravatar June 10, 2009 at 4:55 pm

Dan,

I had the same experience just today. Used this website, OmniPrep, and failed with a 66%. I only missed 1-2 questions on each of the old exams while I was taking them. I definitely focused on the wrong stuff. So for all you people over-working on the old exams, take notice: the test is VERY VERY heavy on PCT, appeals, and 102/103. The old exams don’t test this enough, nor does info on this site (though it’s helpful overall).

Contrary to others, I only had a total of 4 repeaters: Laurel, Abbott, Hardy; DRAM cell (though it was changed up somewhat); 45 day non-publication when filing Japan PCT patent; and the more recent repeater about lip gloss. NOT worth worrying about repeaters… focus on the info!

Other than that, ALL my questions were new. I don’t know if this is becoming a common theme, or whether I got really unlucky.

Just for reference I studied for 3-4 months, about 45hrs/week.

I had plenty of time to look things up in the MPEP, but it doesn’t seem to work for some questions (hard to explain why). I was quick with the searching (looked up 30 of 50 in the AM w/time to spare), and would consider myself “expert” in my ability to search.

Don’t know if I will retake it… not sure where I am going so wrong…

-Sad in CA

Reply

178 Administration TeamNo Gravatar September 15, 2009 at 11:26 am

Dear MyPatentBar.com Readers,

Omni Learning Corporation, the publisher of OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course, strongly disagrees with the negative comments about our course posted on this message board. Our mission is to produce the highest quality patent bar course to ensure that our students achieve success on their USPTO exam. Because we are confident about the quality of our course, OmniPrep offers the best money back guarantee in the industry. Since our students’ success is our priority, we are extremely diligent about addressing all student questions and concerns. Given that 98% of our students pass the patent bar exam, we question whether these comments are real complaints, or more likely, false statements posted by a competitor. If these are real complaints, or if you have any questions regarding our course, please contact our Administration Department at: admin (AT) omnipreppatent (DOT) com.

Thank you.

Administration Team
OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course
Omni Learning Corporation

Reply

179 SamNo Gravatar June 10, 2009 at 5:51 pm

Dear Sad in CA,

I am sorry to hear that. I am actually studying for the exam as you and Dan did; except I have an old PLI home study course. I am reviewing all old exams (twice), reviewing outlines of the PLI course I made and just reviewing wrong questions over and over. Please advise what I should do differently.

I am a little surprised you had so little repeats. Everyone else who posted seemed to get up to 60 percent repeats. It could be that you u got unlucky with a very hard version.

Do you happen to remember what sort of appeal and PCT questions you encountered? Were they very obscure?? Thanks

Anne

Reply

180 Sad in CANo Gravatar June 10, 2009 at 7:55 pm

Anne,

I had about 5 additonal repeats, but they were completely changed repeats (the mirror, but a different question & answer; the 20%A20%B60%C/D but a different question & answer; etc). Oh, also had the repeater about the 147 total claims, but they changed the numbers up, so 147 wasn’t an option. So I would DEFINITELY caution against looking quickly at the question & thinking you know the answer. Often they have changed the question entirely. Or at the very least moved the answers around.

I would personally say that you really need to know the ins & outs of the sections 700/2100, the appeals/reissue/reexam, and the PCT (in particular foreign priority!). Everything else you can just look up–the search feature, contrary to what a lot of people say, is fairly simple to use. You click into the chapter you want (they list the chapters & titles), and search right in the chapter. Occationally it’s hard to find the right answer, but 70% of the time, it’s within a 3 min search window or so.

The questions I had on the PCT were mostly questions that gave you a series of dates (filed in Japan on X, filed a PCT app on Y without declaring priority of the Japan app, filed US stage on Z, what date is the prior art date?) and asked you questions about the dates. VERY little else re: PCT. But know about nat’l filing stage, etc. I didn’t have any of the repeaters about Costa Rica, Sweden, etc.
Sorry if that isn’t clear… my mind is still a bit jumbled. Look to the 2003 exam–I am sure there was a question about foreign apps & prior art dates. There’s also a nifty table in the MPEP in the PCT chapter (1800-208?) that has the information (which is only helpful if the question is on point).

For appeals, know pretty much everything & every type of appeal: who can do it, when, how the different processes work together or seperate, what happens post-appeal (depending on what the Bd says), etc. I spent a good bit of time in 1200, 1400, 2300.

Re: 700/2100, I would caution against going nuts on these. Just know the basics of 102/103 & you can look the quirky stuff up. I did have 2 questions on combination/subcombination (never had looked at it as far as I could quickly remember), 2 on enabling references, and oath/declarations.

What else… oh, had 2 on design patents (1 int’l –but not the Spain repeater, 1 U.S.); 2 on express mail; and, surprisingly, a good 10 on assignees & their rights (300/400/etc); know ink colors (didn’t have the repeater on ink, but did have one); correction of inventorship; duty to disclose/fraud/inequitable conduct in a re-issue or re-exam (had to look that one up).

Had nothing on: ISRs, inventor’s death, protest, mutiple dependent claims, drawings, double patenting, fees of any sort, provisional v. nonprovisional apps,

Had only 5-10 “scenario” questions total– the rest were (A/B/C/D/none of the above/all of the above; I only/I, II/I and III only) types.

The thing you definitely need to know is the interaction between the chapters. Most of the time, your answer comes from 2 different chapters, so you need to know where to go look.

I just found that a LOT of my questions were really bizarre. The guy next to me had a completely different test (we spoke after) & didn’t have nearly as many questions on the PCT or appeals chapters, but was much heavier on the repeaters (he didn’t pass by a point).

I would say my mistake was not knowing the ins & outs of a lot of the sections (PCT!) better. It’s easy to find the easy answers in the MPEP, but it’s nearly impossible to find some of the quirkier, more “nuanced” answers. So for next time I will probably look at a lot more of the subtle things in the chapters. For instance, “you can broaden a re-issue w/i the 2yr period” helps NOT at all–of course you can, that’s simple, everyone can find that in the MPEP. But can you figure out exactly when a claim is broadened, or what happens if you want to do a divisional app in the reissue to split the invention in 2 so that you can have your part all to yourself? It’s that sort of “second level” thought that I think really helps connect sections & concepts together and would probably make the exam easier.

I am going to stop writing now, but let me know if you have more questions… I would be happy to answer them.

Re: Logistics of Testing Center
On a testing center note, they were CRAZY! The people who mentioned you couldn’t take anything in w/you were on the money… can’t take ANYTHING. The tutorial lasts up to 15 min. You click through the screens, then it gives you a “click here when ready to start” screen. I had a good 13.5min to do whatever I wanted before I had to start. The break lasts UP TO an hr–the computer times your break–so don’t be late back. And it starts right in w/no warm up. The computer lets you “mark” a question if you either skip it or you mark an answer but want to come back to it. You can go “next” or “previous” to move between any of the 50 questions in the section. At the end, it will give you a button so you can look at all your “marked” questions & take the time to go hunt down the answers. Whether or not they are “marked”, once you finally submit the questions the computer ign. the “marked” designation… but it is helpful for you to flag questions. I had no issue w/reading the screen–it was a flat screen, crystal clear. The questions were in size 12-14 font, so plenty large. The Adobe they used was a MODIFIED old Adobe Acrobat Reader–so it didn’t even have all the features of normal adobe acrobat–but no worries–you wouldn’t use them anyway. The computer keeps the time remaining in the top right, so you never actually have to go look for it (good thing since they don’t let you have a watch). I echo what someone else said about others in the testing room–there were 3-4 other types of exams that day & they definitely were distracting a bit.

Reply

181 neocogNo Gravatar June 10, 2009 at 10:55 pm

A big thank you to all of you who posted here. I took the exam today and passed.
I reckon about 25-30% Qs are repeat questions. More focus is on exams from Winter 2001 onwards.
Repeat Questions- Tribell, Moondust, Mirror (reflective-perpendicular /||, Costa Rica(nationality) filing in US-what is filing date. If claim missed out in international app. how to respond to notice of missing parts). Appeal Questions-what happens to claims if Appeal is withdrawn-no brief is filed. I guess they asked the same question three times differently. Fill in the blanks, claim status. etc. Powers of the board to remand -additional requirements that the board can ask the examiner to do. Chapter 7 flowchart-references-two questions.
Two-three questions protest. How filed. when filed. -hypo-competitor has got patent issued with claims similar to your clients patent. what can not be done.
There was a question on combination/sub-combination-look up chapter 800. Standard Q from chapter 100/200-access to parts. If you are given application number(not published yet), and you call up FIU whether they will respond to you or not. If attorney is assigned part of patent-whether need permission from LRs. One Q about Tech. Center Director for deciding issue of restriction requirement.
Multiple Questions on Appeal. Protest-2-3. What happens if you pay issue fee and you receive new art – withdrawal from issue. etc.

If I could point three most important chapters-Appendix R, 700 and 2100.

Thanks once again.

Reply

182 CWNo Gravatar June 11, 2009 at 1:30 pm

I took and passed the exam yesterday. I feel that I was well prepared, and it seemed easier than previous exams. The fact patterns were shorter, so it was quicker. I did not have a ton of repeats, but the questions were not too different from past tests. I had no PCT questions in the AM and only a handfull in the PM. I’d say the section with the most questions would be Appeal, then reissue.

Time to payback the brain trust. Let me know if there are any specific questions you have.

Questions that I remember include:

Parking Meter- Same as past exam
Hydrocyclone – Same as past exam
DRAM- Same as past exam
Moondust – Same as past exam
Tribell- Same as past exam
Cancer/Alleviating pain – Same as past exam
150deg/300deg – Same as past exam
Jon–>John- Same question, different answers, in this one an ADS is filed.

Tin Foil Airplane – same as has been posted. The answer is to maintain rejection (same as the bricks with pine/balsa wood)

Lip Balm- same as has been posted, public use bar because she used it after testing was complete

Potter- same as past exam. No matter how many times I did this question in practice, I screwed it up, so I just picked the same answer

Ti Baseball- Similar to what has been mentioned. I am pretty sure that the correct answer is the day that it is indexed and catalogued. The fact pattern seemed to be slightly different than what has been posted, but it related to a brochure (not the ball itself) in the museum.

ABCDE- same as past exam, okay to broaden even though original request was to narrow, since broadening occurred on the 2 year date.

Japanese nonpublication request- Similar to past exam, I think that they tweaked the answers such that only one was correct this time.

Mexicans and Americans File in US – No good because it was in Spanish

Japanese application – In Japanese, transmitted to the IB after payment of the issue fee. There was a similar choice (wrong) that said transmit to the Japanese Bureau

Multiplicity – (2 pice Broom) Call practitioner, get election, reject all claims, review the ones that were agreed upon (verbatim from the MPEP)

Assignee not of record – What can he sign? I chose that he could sign a request for status of an application, as anyone can do that. The other choices were terminal disclaimers, small entity status, amendments. The only other one that may be okay is SE status, but I read the CFR as stating that they needed to be of record.

5.5% Ni 8% Mo question – What’s best argument to overcome rejection when your application covers range 4 – 7% Ni & 6 – 11 % Mo and you disclose best mode at 6% & 9%? Answer is to amend claim to be 9%Mo, since it would not be anticipated any more.

Linking claim- after election, the linking claim is examined with the elected claims (verbatim from the MPEP)

Tables on CD ROM- 52 tables 1/2page each. There was only one acceptable answer, I’m pretty sure that it was do not submit on CD. But all of the CD choices were
wrong, because they were not submitted in duplicate and there was another wrong choice about a magnetic tape or something.

Small Entity- Similar to past exam, SE was claimed, but license was sold prior to application. Must submit the difference and a statement.

Maintenance Fee- What to do if it was not recorded. (from the MPEP) but basically, you need to show that you paid it before the expiration, and you protest, and if you win you get your $ back.

Fraud- Examiner can use knowledge not in the reissue record of a court decision to reject for deceptive intent

Address Change – for only one of 4 inventors address changes, only they need to submit a new form, but they need to name the other inventors

Public inspection – Assignment records are either all open or all closed, can’t be open for one patent and closed for an unpublished application

Death of inventor – A few of them, cant remember exactly, but they were pretty straight forward (remember that the employer could not prosecute, because they were not an assignee)

Fax- what can you fax, right from 37 CFR

Claiming Priority – 1st sentence of spec, ADS, etc right from the MPEP

Piecemeal – Right from the MPEP

Trade Secret – From the MPEP. Which is correct question? When stuff is expunged, etc. The only “right” answer didn’t seem great, it basically said that if the material is not material to patentability it will remain in the sealed envelope in the file. But the other 4 were not right. One seemed like it should be right, but isn’t, material favorable to patentability should not be submitted (724.03).

102(d)- This was the only question that I had a “hard time” with. Fact pattern supported a 102(d) rejection. Not enough info for 102(b). If the examiner can make a 102(d) rejection should they also make a 102(a) rejection. I said only 102(d), as it is a statutory bar, but I could not find support for this in the MPEP.

102(e)- only a couple. Remember that priority from a PCT to a “foreign application” does not allow the foreign app to become a 102(e) date. Just follow the charts in 700.

Graham inquiries – Same as past exam.

PCT- If only the US is designated the US will not publish at 18monts, but when the application enters the national stage. This is an exception right in the MPEP

Priority- Can’t remember exactly, something like can priority be added after issue. Found the answer in the MPEP.

Search – First search (904)

Court decision- If a court finds a patent not invalid (double negative) examiner can still find reasons to reject (it is not binding)

Appeal – A few, including rehearings, I read the section during the exam. There were also a few new ground of rejection from the board. One on late filing of Brief 4mos,
attorney would have to revive a terminated… Claim 1 rejected, claims 2-6 objected to because of 1, claims 7-10 okay, examiner can rewrite in independent form or allow applicant to.

Remand from board – same as past exam, even though its not really correct (answer was to make examiner consider an affidavit)

Design patent – know that you have only 6 months to claim priority.

Best Mode – Is part of 112 1st paragraph (enablement)

3rd party submission

Chemical Claim – Same as the one referenced on this site. Examiner rejects because there is no description as to how its made. Response is that it was common in the
art. There is a whole section on this in the MPEP, had to read it during the exam.

Multi-dependent claim

Transparent layer adhesive question- Fact pattern was the same, but the choices were all different. Need to figure out what is an acceptable claim, was really a trasitional phrases question (comprising/consisting of)

Reply

183 johnsonNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 12:25 am

I took the exam just a few days ago and passed. Though it was my THIRD time taking the exam. The first time I failed, I thought I could just go in there and pass just knowing the stuff I learned in my Patent Law class. BAD IDEA. I failed, barely getting more than half right. The second time, I used the PLI course materials, and they were good, but was kinda hit by surprise with all the Appeal and PCT questions. I failed with a 65. I did only 1 practice test and that definitely cost me.

The third time I took it, I used Bullseye’s outline (about 120 pages or so) to refresh everything (I failed in October 2008, and didn’t start up again until March 2009). I basically used the Bullseye schedule (but I sped it up since I was studying 7-8 hours a day) and I found the Bullseye material easier to digest than PLI’s, and the PCT coverage was a lot better.

I followed this review with the 4 practice tests from 2002-2003. I did 50 questions a day instead of the 100, so I could review the test and not be overwhelmed. I scored around the 70-80 consistently. I reviewed every question to make sure I knew why I got questions right and why I got questions wrong. Then I would skim the Bullseye outline again and look through my notes from the outline. Then I took the 4 tests again, marking all the questions I still wasn’t ABSOLUTELY confident with. I was answering a lot faster since I was repeating the tests, so I did 100 questions a day this time and reviewed all the marked questions. By this time, I was hitting the 90s consistently. Then I then went through all the exam questions posted on this site just to cover any new questions I can find. and I finally passed. On the test itself, there were probably 20 repeats and so the saved time was definitely helpful.

I’m sure there are probably better approaches out there, but that was mine and I thought maybe someone out there might be curious. I failed twice before I finally passed, so if anyone is feeling discouraged, keep going! with practice, your score can only go up.

Reply

184 AshwiniNo Gravatar June 17, 2009 at 11:56 pm

Hi Johnson,

Congratulations on passing the Exam! Are you planning to sell your bullseye and PLI materials? I am looking for used review materials. Please let me know if you are interested in selling yours.

Thanks.

Reply

185 JohnsonNo Gravatar June 23, 2009 at 2:34 am

Hey Ashwini, I’m interested in selling my materials, but they’re still kinda all over the place because I started studying for a state bar exam right after the patent bar so i never got around to putting all the materials back together again. I was planning on putting them on craigslist or ebay within the next week or so.

email me at solaris1123 (ats) gmail (dots) com and I can send you a link to the ebay/craigslist page once i put it up. i have the PLI materials (though i think they’re a 2004 version), the current Bullseye Outline (marked up by me), and some Patbar.com materials that I never used (but some of it was marked by the previous owner).

186 cindyNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 10:22 am

Hi CW,
Congratulation on your pass!!!
I have a question about the “Assignee not of record” you mentioned.” What can he sign? I chose that he could sign a request for status of an application, as anyone can do that. The other choices were terminal disclaimers, small entity status, amendments. The only other one that may be okay is SE status, but I read the CFR as stating that they needed to be of record.”

However based on the discussion on this board, http://mypatentbar.com/2008/08/18/q-assignment/
It seems that the small entity status should be the right answer.

Would you mind elaborate on this?

Thank.

Reply

187 CWNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Yeah I know that was the discussion, but I don’t buy it. The question said assignee not of record and not making themselves of record with the request (they didn’t use concurrently, but something like that).

Anyone can request status of an application (not that they will get it).

However, if you look at small entity requirements, 37 CFR 1.27 (c)(2), it provides for (i) attorney/agent of record (ii) inventor (iii) assignee of entire interest. The key is that the assignee section links to 37 CFR 3.73(b), and if you read that section it is clear that an assignee needs to establish its ownership to the satisfaction of the Director…

That’s a long way of saying that the others on the board are wrong and I’m right :)

Another note in general, just because its blogged, does not make it correct. If you can’t reconcile conflicting advice, don’t blindly answer a question. A good example is the Ti Baseball. Unless there are multiple versions (as has been reported), that question is as clear as day, and there is all sorts of conflicting advice.

good luck, let me know if you have any other questions

Reply

188 AshNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 9:53 pm

Dear CW Cindy,

Are you sure about the SES vs. status of app? Look at 509.03 II which says
“An assignee asserting small entity status is not
required to submit a 37 CFR 3.73(b) certification
whether the assignee is a partial assignee or an
assignee of the entire right, title, and interest, (but see
paragraph III. below).”

189 AshNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 10:00 pm

also,

section 102 says to get access, it must be assignee of record
“If the application has not
been published, but is pending or abandoned then the
FIU should determine whether the requester is:

(A) an inventor;
(B) an attorney or agent of record in the application;
(C) an assignee of record in the application; or
(D) a person with written authority from (A), (B),
or (C).
….”

190 SamNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 12:15 pm

CW,

What was the answer to the Ti ball. I have been so confused with the posts on this site

Reply

191 CWNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 12:52 pm

The fact pattern in my question was very clear. It was not concerned with the ball per se, just the brochure describing it. It was given to the museum, shelved, there was advertising for the museum (but not directed at the brochure) , wealthy patrons came, and finally it was cataloged and indexed. This is the day that it becomes prior art, and it was July 4 (that’s not to say that it will change). This corresponds with the MPEP that says a thesis that nobody can find is not prior art, but if its indexed and cataloged, then it is…

Reply

192 markNo Gravatar June 12, 2009 at 11:56 pm

Hi Johnson,
Congrats on passing!
You mentioned that you did not pass the 2nd time because you got a 65.
I was under the assumption that in order to pass, you need to get 70% out of the 90 questions that count, or 63 correct answers (because 10 questions are “beta questions” that don’t count). So I’m thinking that you should have passed with a 65. What am I missing?
Thanks,
Mark

Reply

193 johnsonNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 4:33 am

hey mark,

you’re right, you need 70% to pass or 63 (of 90). I don’t remember if that 65 was a % or a straight score, but it had to have been a % (or a third attempt wouldn’t have been necessary!). so im pretty sure that score you get at the end of the exam is a %. hopefully, if and when you take the exam, you’ll never have to see that % :)

next time i’ll throw in the % to avoid any confusion.

Reply

194 markNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 3:04 pm

thanks. So I guess that 63 is the magic number.

195 scruffNo Gravatar June 14, 2009 at 1:17 pm

Question related to 35 USC 102(e)(1) and (2) prior art dates.

Applicant files a patent application in Japan on February 28, 1996. Applicant files a PCT international application designating the US on February 27, 1997, based on the Japanese application. The international application is published in English on August 28, 1997. The international application enters the national stage in the US on August 28, 1998. The USPTO publishes the application on June 7, 2001 at the request of the applicant. The application issues as a US patent on December 4, 2001.

For the US patent, what is the patent’s earliest date, for prior art purposes as a patent, in view of the amendment to 35 USC 102(e) by the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999?

A February 28, 1996
B February 27, 1997
C August 28, 1997
D August 28, 1998
E December 4, 2001

It is my understanding that since the patent resulted from an IA filed prior to 11/29/00, it may not reach back to obtain the IA’s filing date. Instead, we must revert back to the pre-AIPA form of 35 USC 102(e) which states that the 102(e) prior art date is when the patent application complied with 35 USC 371, i.e. the National Stage entry date. This seems to be in accordance with example 6 in MPEP 606.02(f)(1). However, the PTO says that the correct answer is E! Heck, E isn’t even the correct 102(a) or (b) prior art dates!

There is a follow up question with the same fact pattern that reads:

When examining an application filed on or after November 29, 2000 or any application that has been voluntarily published, what is its earliest possible prior art date, for the June 7th US published application in view of 35 USC 102(e) as amended by the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999?

A February 28, 1996
B February 27, 1997
C August 28, 1997
D August 28, 1998
E June 7, 2001

Firstly, the filing date of the application under examination is irrelevant under the amended form of 35 USC 102(e). The June 7th US published application resulted from the IA application that was filed prior to 11/27/00. Thus, according to the MPEP, there is no 102(e)(1) prior art date! Obviously this is not the correct answer, but I don’t understand why.

Somebody help!!

Reply

196 CWNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 2:00 pm

If these are the questions on a past exam (cant recall correctly now). but the answers are now D and D. The law changed and the past exam answer key is incorrect.

Reply

197 SolNo Gravatar February 6, 2012 at 1:06 am

So trick. To understand why e is the answer, pay attention yo the question what is the prior art date for the patent not the lateens app publication so the answer is the issuance date as 102a or b date. No real 102e date. Similarly your following question is asking about the app publication so it’s publication date as 102ab date

Reply

198 CWNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 2:12 pm

ASH – Couldn’t reply to your post, hopefully you see this. I do understand your question.

Two things (1) anybody can request the status of an application. That does not mean that the USPTO will provide it. As such, an assignee not of record could sign a request for status, but the USPTO would not grant the request, because they aren’t the inventor, attorney or assignee of record. (2) If you read paragraph III in the text you provided me, it will refer you to 37 CFR 1.33 which in turn points you to 3.71(b) which says

“(1) A single assignee. An assignee of the entire right, title and interest in the application or patent being reexamined who is of record, or
(2) Partial assignee(s) together or with inventor(s). All partial assignees, or all partial assignees and inventors who have not assigned their right, title and interest in the application or patent being reexamined, who together own the entire right, title and interest in the application or patent being reexamined.
A partial assignee is any assignee of record having
less than the entire right, title and interest in the application or patent being reexamined.

So, would I stake the life of my child on my answer, no, but I’m pretty sure that I’m correct (90+%). SE status is pretty clear that you need to be of record, and the status of an application is a bit more gray, so I think that its one of those where it is the most correct answer.

Reply

199 CWNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 2:17 pm

Just note, I could be wrong above, so please read the MPEP and come to your own conclusion.

The issue comes down to this. Is the question wanting you to take the leap that the assignee not of record is signing it, but someone of record is filing it (doesn’t make sense – if someone of record is filing it, they would also sign it). Or is it wanting you to assume that anyone can request the status, even if its not going to be provided (obfuscation). Maybe its a beta question, who knows.

Reply

200 SamNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 6:30 pm

Dear CW,

Thanks for your honest answer. I am a little confused as well. Does anyone else have any input.

201 scruffNo Gravatar June 15, 2009 at 2:12 pm

Do you recall which exam these are from? I got them from the Patent Education Series PatEngine Simulator (which was a total waste of money by the way).

I understand why the first answer is D, because it is the date that the application entered the national stage. However, I don’t understand why the printed publication would have any 102(e)(1) prior art date at all in the second question. Instead, its 102(a) and (b) date would be the date of publication. If the IA was filed on or after 11/29/00, then the printed publication could reach back so that it’s 102(e)(1) date is when the IA was filed…but this is clearly not the case.

Reply

202 CWNo Gravatar June 16, 2009 at 9:51 am

April 2002 AM, questions 11&12.

If you follow the flow charts on 700-40 you would get D for the 1st one. On the second one, it also has a 102(a) and (b) date, but take a look at the Example 9 on 700-38 for the 102(e) date, its pretty much the same scenario.

Reply

203 scruffNo Gravatar June 16, 2009 at 4:19 pm

CW-

Thanks for finding those questions in the past exam. However, I disagree with you on your use of the flow chart on Pg. 700-40 for #11. Box 1: the reference is a US application publication of an IA after National Stage entry. Therefore, we go to Box #2 on the left: While the application under examination was filed on or after Nov. 29, 2000, the IA application was filed on Feb. 27, 1997. Recall that the date of the application under examination is irrelevant, and all that matters is that the reference (the June publication) is based on an IA filed PRIOR to Nov. 29, 2000 (see MPEP 706.02(a)(I) B, pg. 25). Thus, the answer to Box 2 is “no”, and we go to Box 3 on the right: “For a US appl. publication: no 102(e) date”. How do you get answer choice D (which by the way is incorrect according to the PTO. They say the correct answer is B. I don’t even understand why that is correct)?

Also, Ex. 9 is based on a continuation application of an IA. Isn’t Ex. 6 more appropriate? Either way, they both give you the wrong answer!!! I’m rather confused on this matter.

Reply

204 CWNo Gravatar June 18, 2009 at 3:11 pm

B was correct based upon the MPEP that was tested for the Apr2002 test. You can go back and download that one if you’d like, and you would see why their answer is correct “for the time” but not for now.

You are stuck on the 102(e) date of the IA, which is none. There is not enough information to know how it entered the national stage, but if you had to choose one of those dates, which would you choose? If none was a choice, I’d pick that one too. A+B+C are wrong. E is the date of the patent, so I pick D as the most correct… If you choose no to box 1 you will get to choice D.

BUT, this is kind of a BS discussion. There will not be questions like this on the exam. The questions have been updated for the current law, so you should be able to use the flow charts properly…

There are quite a few questions where the answers are not really correct anymore due to law changes, so whenever it looked funny, I pulled up the old MPEP and usually had it figured out in a few seconds…

Reply

205 scruffNo Gravatar June 16, 2009 at 4:26 pm

CW-

You also mentioned that the law changed and therefore the correct answers are both D (I still contend that the flow chart does not support that answer for the publication). The question specifically makes reference to the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999. Are you referring to the further amended form of 102(e) stemming from the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2002?

That might solve the mystery as to why the PTO’s answers are clearly wrong. However, it still seems to me that the publication does not have a 102(e) date.

Reply

206 CWNo Gravatar June 18, 2009 at 3:12 pm

Yes, and see above.

Reply

207 SamNo Gravatar June 16, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Scruff,

DO you know the answer to the question discussed above about:

Assignee not of record can sign: small entity status or request for status of an app

Reply

208 scruffNo Gravatar June 16, 2009 at 5:31 pm

Sam-

As I understand it, anyone can request the status of an application and is entitled to such information if that person is:
- an inventor
- an attorney or agent of record in the application
-an assignee of record in the application
-a person with written authority from any of those persons named above

However, if the person is NOT one of the above, then he/she may still be entitled to such information if
-the application is identified in a published patent document
-the application claims the benefit of the filing date of an application that is identified in a published patent document.
(MPEP 102 and 37 CFR 1.14(2)).

Thus, it seems that an assignee not of record can request status of an app (as may anyone) and may be entitled to such if the app meets the conditions set forth in this section.

As for small entity status, all parties under 37 CFR 1.33(b) may assert entitlement to SES by writing. 1.33(b) includes an assignee provided for under 3.71, and 3.71 states that the single and partial assignees must be of record. It’s a round about way of getting to the answer but I would concur that assignees not of record may not assert entitlement to SES.

Lastly, it’s interesting to note that MPEP 509.03 III states that “while a partial assignee may sign a written assertion [for small entity status], the written assertion must be filed by an appropriate party under 37 CFR 1.33(b).”

I think this is in accordance with what CW said.

Reply

209 SeanNo Gravatar June 17, 2009 at 12:34 am

Hi, I am taking past exams to study for the Patent Bar. Does anyone remember that the April 2000 PM exam had a lot of “fringe” topic questions? For example, from MPEP chapters regarding ownership, assignment, receipt, interferences (not that fringey, but still). This exam doesn’t have the usual issues people study for – applications, examinations, and patentability. I wonder whether this exam was particularly difficult when it was given nine years ago. Just wondering…

Reply

210 scruffNo Gravatar June 18, 2009 at 3:29 pm

CW-

I agree that we must answer the question using the most current version of the MPEP (I did not realize that the previous question relied on the form of 35 USC 102(e) before the Intellectual Property and High Technology Technical Amendments Act of 2002.).

Of course, we are using obsolete answer choices to try and answer the question in light of the new laws. Since “no date” is not an option, I guess the only one that makes sense is D, as you stated.

However, I disagree with you about your logic. It seems to me that we know exactly when the application reached the national stage: August 28, 1998, as stated in the fact pattern. The June 7th 2001 publication is clearly after national stage entry. Thus, the answer to box 1 in the flowchart must be “yes”. How can it be “no”?

Reply

211 CWNo Gravatar June 19, 2009 at 9:16 am

The only open issue is that it does not mention 371. If it said entered the national stage via 371, then I would agree with you 100%.

Again, we’re going back and forth on how a question would apply with different law, so its a moot point.

A piece of advice, if you get a question wrong, and you think that it may be right, go back to the MPEP version that was used for the test. You will find more cases where the law has changed, or the MPEP has been changed, thus making the question “not great”.

Another example is a past exam question (Apr 03 AM #25) that asked in which case can the BPAI NOT send back to the primary examiner. The answer that they are looking for is to consider an affidavit. Well, that is a valid reason now. So the first time I went through the question, I picked A, because it seemed too “soft” (best answer). Anyway, if you go back to the version of the MPEP for the test, the text of answer A is verbatim in the MPEP, so if I was using that MPEP, I would have gotten the question right. FWIW, I got that question with all of the same choices on my real exam, so it has not been updated.

Reply

212 necogNo Gravatar June 18, 2009 at 3:52 pm

You need NOT memorize the examples of 102(e) dates in Chapter 700. Just learn to use the flowcharts.
You will come up with the correct answer every time -no matter how screwed the fact pattern is.

All you need to memorize is the main TOC of the MPEP-that is just the chapter names.

Reply

213 scruffNo Gravatar June 18, 2009 at 3:53 pm

amen to that…

Reply

214 DanNo Gravatar June 20, 2009 at 9:07 am

Is anyone interested in selling the PLI books and CD’s? I can offer $500.

Cheers,
Dan

Reply

215 scruffNo Gravatar June 21, 2009 at 3:59 pm

The procedures in the MPEP do not require an applicant claiming foreign priority in nonprovisional utility application to:

A) Submit the processing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(i) if the claim for priority or submission of the ceritfied copy of the priority document is made after payment of the issue fee and before the patent is granted.

B) Identify the foreign application for which priority is being claimed as well as any foreign application for the same subject matter having a filing date before that of the application for which priority is being claimed.

C) File the claim in the application

D) Have the same inventive entity listed in the foreign application as in the US application in which the priority claim has been filed.

E) Identify the intellectual property authority or country in or for which the foreign application was filed.

PTO says D is the correct choice. However, C is clearly not required, since the claim must be filed during the pendency of the 2nd application, and the later of 4 months after the 2nd application or 16 months after the first. Thus, I think C is the correct answer. Also, the MPEP says that the applicant must be the same for both applications. Does this imply that the inventive entities are the same?

Is this a case of an outdated question?

Reply

216 msNo Gravatar June 22, 2009 at 11:18 am

RE Prometric Format

Is the second half of the exam numbered 51-100 or 1-50?

Can I hang out by the computer during by lunch break and write on my scratch paper or access the MPEP?

Reply

217 TexPatBarNo Gravatar June 22, 2009 at 9:22 pm

ms,

When my time ran out on the morning section a one hour clock started counting down for my lunch break. As far as I know I could have stayed in my seat and stared at the screen if I had wanted to. I went out to my car, had a quick bite, and came back to start the second section after about 20 minutes. I can’t remember if the afternoon was numbered 51 to 100.

Reply

218 danNo Gravatar June 26, 2009 at 1:43 pm

I’m fairly sure that the 2nd half was numbered 51 to 100. (maybe 95% sure, but I would not bet the farm on that).

Reply

219 BobbyNo Gravatar June 26, 2009 at 6:42 pm

The second half is numbered 1-50. I remember I had written out 1-50 then 51-100 at the beginning and being messed up by it for the second half.

Reply

220 danNo Gravatar June 27, 2009 at 8:49 am

Thanks Bobby. I’m glad I did not bet the farm! I also wrote out 1-50 and 51-100 before the test, so maybe that’s why I incorrectly thought the second half was numbered 51-100?

Reply

221 AshleyNo Gravatar June 29, 2009 at 4:10 pm

Has anyone taken the exam recently?

Reply

222 CasNo Gravatar July 6, 2009 at 1:23 pm

Dear All,

Has anyone taken the exam recently and willing to share experience/questions seen? I am taking the exam in a few days and would appreciate any feedback. Thanks

Reply

223 scruffNo Gravatar July 6, 2009 at 10:13 pm

A few questions…

1) 35 USC 102(a) bars an applicant from obtaining a patent that was known about or used by others in the US, or described in a printed publication anywhere in the world, before the DATE OF THE INVENTION. This means that the filing date of the application is irrelevant. Is this correct? It seems as though the PTO only addresses the filing date in 102(a) questions, and not the date of conception.

2) As I understand it, “constructive reduction to practice” describes the fact that the applicant has successfully satisfied the written description and enablement requirement. In this sense, the applicant knows how to make and use the invention, and how to successfully enable others to do so, but has not actually reduced the invention to practice, i.e., there is no prototype. While an actual reduction to practice is sufficient for satisfying these requirements, it is not necessary. Or perhaps an actual reduction to practice is not needed to obtain a filing date, but IS needed to obtain the patent? Can anyone clarify?

3) Is it true that all 102(e) references are also 102(a) references (though not all 102(a) references are 102(e) references because 102(a) references may include printed publications that are not patents or patent applications/publications)?

Reply

224 scruffNo Gravatar July 9, 2009 at 11:32 am

1 more question: Adobe Reader 5.1 (and all subsequent versions) display the title of each section next to the section number under the bookmark tab in the column on the left side. Does Prometric’s actual electronic version of the MPEP have the same labels or is it just section numbers, i.e., “2100″ instead of “2100: Patentability” or “Appendix R” instead of “Appendix R: Patent Rules”?

Reply

225 MacieNo Gravatar July 12, 2009 at 6:30 pm

I took the test yesterday and passed. The morning portion of the test was harder than the older exam here to me, may be simply because I am familiar with the test questions here, I thought the afternoon one could be easier, but there is a lot of more surprises in the afternoon. I completed the question in about 2 hours and had one hour to check the ones I marked, I had a lot of marked ones in the afternoon than in the morning, they are the ones with answer I was either not completely sure or simply do not know at all. I did not have enough time to go though the marked ones in the afternoon test before the timer ended, that was how bad it was, the thought about failure was dreadful when I started the afternoon test and had to mark a lot of questions. This is my first try, I am so glad, do not really like to feel to put more time to study this thing anymore.

The site benefited me before I took the test, so I would like to contribute things I remembered. Will not repeat any that had been mentioned before. The repeat question may be around 15%, many questions were asking to find the ones that is the “except”. Following are some thing I can remember( could not remember the exact question):
1. MPEP 2257, listing of prior art in patent, (except)
2. Document needed in assignment (except)
3. Examiner’s action after appeal and application requested rehearing
4. Amendment with new argument can be entered after appeal brief . ( I chose the one the related to court decision that just came out)
5. The Board affirmed examiner’s rejection to claim 1-10, and entered new ground of rejection, application submit amendment overcome new ground of rejection and also overcome the affirmed rejection, and reopen the prosecution, what is the right action of the examiner.
6. What assignees can sign before establish the assignment record ( I chose the small entity answer)

Take the old exam are helpful, but I think spending time to really understand some of the important concept, rules and procedures are really critical.

Anyone has some suggestions to a person has no experience in patent application and prosecution but want to start?

Thanks and good luck to you!

Reply

226 AmyNo Gravatar July 12, 2009 at 10:16 pm

Macie,

I am taking the test in a few days. Do you remember your answer to 5? What other questions can you remember….(even if they’ve been listed on the board). Do you have any tips for me or particular sections I should review? Thanks and good luck w/ your job hunt

Reply

227 MacieNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 10:39 am

Amy,

I only remember some of choices of the #5 given, (not the exactly wording)
A. Examiner allow the application
B. Examiner refuse the application
C. Return the application to the Board upon the amendment overcome the old rejection
D. Return the application to the Board upon the amendment overcome the new ground of rejection.

I chose D

Reply

228 MacieNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 2:55 pm

Amy,

One of the question related to PCT and 102(e) prior art date has been posted before. The application is an continuation application of the PCT app, which benefits the prior art date of the provision application in USTPO. The question is asking what is the 102(e) prior art date of the continuation application.

Reply

229 scruffNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 10:00 am

Amy-

I think the answer to your question can be found in MPEP 1214.06 IV: 37 CFR 41.50 (b) Rejection, which states:

“If the Board affirms the examiner’s rejection, but also enters a new ground of rejection under 37 CFR 41.50(b), the subsequent procedure depends upon the action taken by the appellant with respect to the rejection.”

The section then summarizes two possible scenarios and their consequences. Also, the next section, 1214.07: Reopening of Prosecution says that if the amendment is submitted with an RCE (provided that the app is a utility/plant filed after 6/8/95), the prosecution of the application will be reopened and the amendment will be entered.

Lastly, 37 CFR 41.50(b) states that the new ground of rejection is binding upon the examiner unless an amendment or new evidence not previously of record is made which, in the opinion of the examiner, overcomes the new ground of rejection stated in the decision.

Regarding #4, according to MPEP 1206 I, amendments filed on or after the date of filing an appeal brief may be admitted ONLY to:

A Cancel claims, where such cancellation does not affect the scope of any other pending claim in the proceeding; or

B) rewrite dependent claims into indpt form

It doesn’t say anything about new court decisions (although, the attorney may present arguments based upon a recent relevant decision of a Federal Court when requesting a rehearing)

Any thoughts or comments? Anybody care to address my previous questions?

Reply

230 MacieNo Gravatar July 14, 2009 at 9:56 am

something in MPEP 1214 procedure following board decision. page 1007/3035: ( I put it here, which may help ?)

The new ground of rejection raised by the Board
does not reopen * prosecution except as to that subject
matter to which the new rejection was applied. If the
Board’s decision in which the rejection under 37 CFR
*>41.50(b)41.50(b)41.50(b)41.50(b)41.50(b)< rejection and may not include the
affirmed rejection. If the application does not become…..

Reply

231 scruffNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 10:10 am

Also, regarding #6, I believe that the Small Entity Status answer is wrong (see posts 171 and 176 above)

Reply

232 MacieNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 10:41 am

Thanks Scruff. The other choices are even more unlikely to be right to me, like “terminal disclaimer”, unfortunately I do not remember the others

Reply

233 scruffNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 11:24 am

You know, I may have interpreted that question incorrectly. Perhaps the answer choice is referring to the assignee granting access to someone else and not requesting access for themselves. In this case, the assignee must properly establish ownership, which might require a recording (I’m not sure). I know for a fact that requesting SES does not require establishing ownership. You might be right afterall. Any thoughts?

Reply

234 CasNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 12:18 pm

Scruff

There is a discussion above on 167 and 168. I am also very confused about this question. I have reviewed other forums and some test takers say SES vs status of app. I am not sure.

Reply

235 scruffNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 4:15 pm

103(c) provides that one may disqualify the prior art if one can establish that the prior art is a 102(e),(f), or (g) reference, and that both patents/applications were owned by the same party at the time of invention.

This does not apply to prior art references that are 102(a) or (b) references. It seems to me that all 102(e) references are also 102(a) references, provided that they have been published or issued, because 102(a) encompasses printed publications that describe the invention before the date of invention. Thus, 103(c) cannot apply to prior art that is a US patent filed before the application under examination, because under that scenario, the patent would have been published and would become 102 (a) prior art. However, one can use 103(c) to disqualify a US patent application filed before the application under examination if it has not been published.

Is my premise about all non-published 102(e) prior art being 102(a) prior art correct?

Reply

236 ChrisNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 8:40 pm

5. The Board affirmed examiner’s rejection to claim 1-10, and entered new ground of rejection, application submit amendment overcome new ground of rejection and also overcome the affirmed rejection, and reopen the prosecution, what is the right action of the examiner.

This isn’t making sense to me. The Board affirms the rejection to claims 1-10 and entered a new ground of rejection. The applicant re-opens prosecution in front of the examiner. Enters an amendment that overcomes both the new grounds of rejection and the affirmed rejection by the Board. Since both rejections have been overcome there is no need to send the application back to the board but instead allow the application.

If I’m correct and 1214 applies

Prosecution before the examiner of the 37 CFR *>41.50(b)41.50(b)< rejection. If the application becomes allowed, the application should not be returned to the Board

Reply

237 scruffNo Gravatar July 13, 2009 at 9:37 pm

Anybody in the DC area taking the patent bar soon? I’m taking it in a few weeks and I would love to get a study group going…maybe bounce some ideas and thoughts around…

Reply

238 cccNo Gravatar July 15, 2009 at 1:07 am

102(e) references are not necessarily 102(a) references. Not published references at the time of the subject invention (i.e., effective filing date) can be 102(e) references if their US filing date or International filing date are earilier than the effective filing date of the subject invention and then are published after the subject invention.

Reply

239 sarahLNo Gravatar July 17, 2009 at 9:47 am

I am sick and tired of MPEP by now but I feel it is my turn to make a little contribution to this site and its previous contributors from which/whom I have benefited greatly. So here it is:

Rule #1 KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON

Although I had only 3 hour sleep the night before, I was confident when I sat at a computer of a test center, and then questions started popping up which were not quite like in the old exams (2003-2000) I had been drilling on, and they were new, very detailed and ambiguous), and I began to panic a bit after 5 or 8 questions. But I managed to calm down by breathing deeply a few times, and forcing myself to carry on. Repeats showed up and confidence regained. I finished first session in about 1 hour and 15 minutes, which left me a plenty of time to look up 10 marked questions. After that, I even had time to double check all 50 questions and corrected two those “except” mistakes. I was sure I got 45 (+ – 3) right.

When I thought I’d have an easy pass, the 2nd session hit me with unexpected, much tougher questions. It took me about 2 hours to answer all 50 with about 20 questions marked. Some of them I had no clue as where to start looking. But I didn’t allow them to annoy me. Eventually I did look up all marked questions, but not as thoroughly as I would like. I clicked on the end button and did the survey. It’s done.

The point is DON’T PANIC. You will have ups and downs like in life, but it is a relatively balanced test, if you keep calm and stay focused, you should be fine.

Rule #2 YOU LIVE OR DIE ON WHAT YOU’VE MEMORIZED AND YOUR ABILITY TO SEARCH

I used an old version of Longacre’s course to study. Longacre stressed on the first part of this rule. I had followed his strategy through my preparation. Three weeks before the test I was frustrated because I was not able to memorize many details recommended by Jim, even with the aid of flash cards, outlines and audio. I realized it was impossible to remember every tree or path in this MPEP jungle, you have to reply on a map. So I began to focus on how to search and to know the structure of MPEP. It paid off.

Before they computerized the test, Jim’s strategy makes sense. The questions were long then and you would not have much time left to look up MPEP. Now that’s no longer true. Today’s questions are shorter to fit computer screen but more detailed oriented and trickier. It seems that they have shifted a bit towards testing your capability of searching and finding right stuff in MPEP.

So you must not only understand and memorize the core concepts, but you must also be familiar with the structure of MPEP and know how to quickly search it.

Rule #3 FOCUS ON ALREADY TESTED QUESTIONS

Everyone has different ways to study. I got bored easily trying to read MPEP, even those important chapters such as 700, 2100, 1200, 1400, 1800, 2200. They are long and boring. So I ended up reading through not a single chapter at all. I just read a MPEP outline I got from a friend who got from her examiner friend who did her certification exam a yr ago. But I first read An Introduction Patent Law by Mueller to understand patent basics and then Longacre’s to learn MPEP basics. After that I mainly focused on old exam questions and newly reported questions to tight up the core MPEP concepts. Questions make you better understand the concepts and gain confidence for real exam.

Focus on repeats and newly reported questions. But don’t just read through or rely on the tested questions reported in this website. Reporters may not remember right under stress or may not understand it completely, causing more confusion. Only use them as a starting point to expand your knowledge and really understand the concepts tested. For old exam questions, focus on the right answers but more importantly on the wrong ones. If you use adobe 5 to search while studying those questions, that’s even better. You should make your own outline based on these activities. do a daily timed practice.

I guarantee that you will pass the test by following these three rules.

Now let me address what materials to use for study. If money is not an issue, buy most recent courses such as Longacre or PLI, or whatever, or register for live reviews. The older version of Longacre I used didn’t reflect recent shifts of today’s exam, but Jim is great at explaining basic concepts and I truly enjoyed his lecture.

I also think it is totally feasible to pass the patent bar without paying a penny (other than application fee and prometric test fee). This can be achieved by use the well-written outline here on this website and focusing on tested questions, searching MPEP, and practicing old tests on freepatentbar.com.

Ok, enough for strategy. Trying not to repeat what have already been reported, here are some questions I encountered ( not exact words, so don’t trust my memory and my understanding of these questions, double check MPEP and come to your own conclusion):

1. Appellant files a rehearing as well as reopening upon new ground rejection of the Board; what are the examiner’s options; the wording is a little confusing than the old question but it basically tests your understanding of the concept that board will wait until the examiner finishes the prosecution.

2. What can or cannot examiner use to make a 102 rejection: I got stuck with two choices; 1. A claim that contains a few compositions, a prior art includes one of them 2. The examiner may not make a 102 rejection based on a nonanalogous prior art; both seem right but I ended up with 2.

3. Best mode: I narrowed down to two choices; 1. Best mode must be the inventors’, as opposed to others; 2. If applicant put best mode in the spec but did not point out; again both seem to be right but I picked 2 as a safer choice.

4. evil 102(e) again: the fact pattern is as previously reported, but it asks you the earliest prior art date for 102(e)(1); the wording is tricky. You need to pay attention to what is asked; there is NS date, and a publication date of 2003; my question asks what the earliest 102(e)prior art date for the patent publication; it is the example 6 of 706.02(f) additional #2 example; if you only look at example 6, you’d pick NS date.

5. Whom can the PTO give app info to upon oral request: I had no clue about of this one; One choice appears to be attractive at first glance; it says unregistered employee such as a paralegal of an attorney of record, who is authorized by the attorney to obtain the info; the other one says applicant, attorney of record upon recognition based on personal acquaintance. I hesitated about the personal acquaintance and did a quick search and it turned out this was the right one. 104: Access as provided for in the rules, will be given on oral request to any applicant, patentee, assignee, or attorney or agent of record in an application or patent only upon proof of identity or upon recognition based on personal acquaintance.

6. 1.131 question: it is an old question but it puzzles me because it is still in the test data bank; it asks which situation is best for 1.131 affidavit; the clear choice is a non-patent document published less than one yr, but the sole rejection is under 103(a). I think it is a typo; it should be 102(a); you can use 102 to support 103 rejection but it should be for analogousness; it does not fit here; 1.131 can only use for 102(a) and (e).

7. Accessibility to Assignment records question: I had no clue on this one either but it is an easy lookup question; the answer is that a bona fide prospective buyers can have access to the info. 301.01 (b) Assignment records, digests, and indexes relating to any pending or abandoned patent application, which is open to the public pursuant to § 1.11 or for which copies or access may be supplied pursuant to § 1.14, are available to the public. Copies of any assignment records, digests, and indexes that are not available to the public shall be obtainable only upon written authority of the applicant or applicant’s assignee or patent attorney or patent agent or upon a showing that the person seeking such information is a bona fide prospective or actual purchaser, mortgagee, or licensee of such application, unless it shall be necessary to the proper conduct of business before the Office or as provided in this part.

That’s all I can remember for now. Off to the beach I go. So I will not be able to answer any question.

Good luck

Reply

240 scruffNo Gravatar July 17, 2009 at 11:29 am

sarahL-

Thank you very much for the info. It’s quite helpful. In regards to #2, the examiner MAY make a 102 rejection based on nonanalogous prior art because it need not be analogous to be anticipatory (though ti DOES need to be analogous to qualify as 103 prior art): MPEP 2131.05 and 2141.01(a). As to #3, according to MPEP 2165.01 III, the applicant need not point out the best mode in the specification, as long as the spec discloses the best mode.

Reply

241 scruffNo Gravatar July 17, 2009 at 2:20 pm

Note: the prior art exception in 35 USC 103(c) only applies to references that are ONLY prior art under 35 USC 102 (e), (f), (g). Published patent applications filed by another before the filing of the application under examination do not qualify under this rule because they are both 102 (e) AND 102 (a) prior art references. Thus the rule is that 102 (a) trumps 102 (e) in 103(c) considerations.

Reply

242 scruffNo Gravatar July 17, 2009 at 2:31 pm

Regarding #6 of sarahL’s post, there is a similar question in a previous exam: #6 of the AM April 2002 exam. It asks which answer choice DOES NOT accord with proper PTO procedures in response to a 103(a) rejection based on a US patent filed and published by another before the filing of the application under examination. Option B states that you may traverse the rejection by relying on an affidavit or declaration under 37 CFR 1.131 that antedates the Jones reference. This answer is incorrect because this is indeed a proper response. I repeat, ONE MAY TRAVERSE A 102(a) REJECTION BY SWEARING BACK…as long as the reference used in making the rejection is either 102 (a) or (e). In this particular question, the patent application by another actually issued and is therefore 102 (a) prior art.

Incidentally, it is correct that the 103 rejection must be based on analogous art, but the patent app need not claim the same invention (if it did, an interference would be called).

Reply

243 cccNo Gravatar July 19, 2009 at 4:22 am

I took the bar on 15th and passed. The exam was not hard and the questions are shorter than I expected. I would like to remember some questions for you, preparing the exam, here. But before that, I would like to point one thing here with regard to Scruff comments above regarding 102(a) and 102(e). To my knowledge and practice experiencec, 102(e) prior art is different from 102(a) prior art a reference (patent or application) can be 102(a) prior art “as of its publication date”, whereas the reference can be 102(e) prior art “as of its US filing date (or International filing date).” That is, to be cited as 102(a) prior art, it should be “published” before the invention date of the application under examiation. However, to be cited as 102(e) prior art, it does not need to be published before the invention date or the effective filing date of the application under examination. The “, published …” phrase in 102(e) is not limited by the phrase “before the …” in 102(e). For example, when the Examiner finds a patent application (“X”) which is under examination but not yet published, he may “provisionally” reject the application under examination under 102(e) if the claimed subject matter is described in the specification of “X”. Likewise, if he finds a later published patent application (X), he can reject the the application under examination under 102(e) if X has eariler US filing date than the effective filing date of X. Simply speaking, in practce, a US application or patent (i) published before 1year is cited as 102(b) prior art, (ii) published between 1 yr ~ the effective filing date is cited as 102(a) prior art, and (iii) published after the effective filing date but filed earlier than the effective filing date, is cited as 102(e) reference. If I am wrong, please correct me

By the way, those Qs that I remember are:

1. Before 5 minutes from midnight in German, the German attorney has got a Declaration signed by a declarant and a Response. If preparing fax documents, it will be 12:05 am there, but it is 5 or 6 hours before midnight in US. What should he do ? Fax ? Express Mail? abandon and revive ? … there is no choice stating that “fax the signed Declaration and not signed Response”, but a choice is there stating “fax the signed D and Response signed by the German attorney.”

2. When rejected under 102(b), the practitioner measured the drawing and found that the three elements, claimed and disclosed in the drawing of the prior art, have different sizes. That is, the prior art is silent regarding the size of three elements but only showing in the drawing. The other elements/limitations are disclosed in the reference. He argued that point to the Examiner to overcome the rejection. Is it work? No, because it is “of little value” to measure the size in the drawings, or something like that reason.

3. Choose 102(e) date questions — all of 3 Qs are the same. “International filing date”.

4. 1.131 affidavit Q – to overcome 102(a) or 102(e) rejection.

many repeats or derived repeats. If I can remember more, I will visit again.

Reply

244 cccNo Gravatar July 19, 2009 at 4:26 am

I would add one tip. You can use two words for searching MPEP depending on the words. I tried two or three words and found that sometimes it may work. In addition, the monitor and letter were big enough. But, do not forget to click “open” every time you move to another MPEP title. You may fail to find your key word searh result if forgotten.

Reply

245 DJNo Gravatar July 19, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Dear ccc,

can you clarify no 3 above? I am not sure what your answer was?

Thanks

Reply

246 scruffNo Gravatar July 19, 2009 at 12:57 pm

CC-

Thank you very much. So the bottom line is that in the event there is overlap between the classification of prior art, 102(b) trumps 102(a), and 102(a) trumps 102(e).

Reply

247 cccNo Gravatar July 20, 2009 at 1:56 am

No 3. was about 102(e) prior art date simple question. You will read some situations in questions and should find the 102(e) prior art date. all of three Qs were about International applications having foreign priority dates, published in English and designating US. In this case, the prior art date is international filing date unless they were filed before 11/29/1999.

Reply

248 cccNo Gravatar July 20, 2009 at 1:57 am

is the date 11/29/1999 right ? momently confused… Please double check.

Reply

249 scruffNo Gravatar July 20, 2009 at 11:41 am

Actually, it’s 11/29/00…close enough.

Reply

250 DJNo Gravatar July 21, 2009 at 12:04 pm

Dear All,

Thank you very much for your comments. It looks like I had Macie’s exam above. It feels like a blur to me now. I can’t remember any more questions (had Tribell, Document affect title, small entity status, austrailia-abandoned)..hmm.

This is a great site. I wish I had seen it the first time I took the exam.

I am selling my study materials which I received second hand from an examiner friend. I have the lectures, the notes that go along with it, and my own outline for $250. Please send email to abcd1919@aol.com

Reply

251 scruffNo Gravatar July 21, 2009 at 2:08 pm

This might be a really simple question, but can somebody explain the difference between a Notice of Allowance and a Notice of Allowability?

Reply

252 triedandtestedNo Gravatar July 25, 2009 at 6:12 pm

Notice of Allowability usually comes before Notice of Allowance, which is more formal includes Examiner’s reasons for allowance, fees due, due date for fees, Ex. amendments etc.

Reply

253 cindyNo Gravatar July 22, 2009 at 1:12 pm

Does anybody know how long it’ll take the USPTO to send the confirmation letter for registering for the exam? I sent out the application at the beginning of July. I received the postcard that I included in the application a week after that. The check was cashed as well. But when I called in to ask about the confirmation letter. I was told it’s going to take 4-6 weeks for evaluation.

Reply

254 DJNo Gravatar July 22, 2009 at 1:27 pm

I got mine in less than 3 weeks. Yours should be any day now

Reply

255 cindyNo Gravatar July 22, 2009 at 1:39 pm

thank you DJ.

Reply

256 stanNo Gravatar July 31, 2009 at 3:54 pm

Are you registering as an attorney or as an agent?

If you are registering as an attorney, be sure to send in your certificate of good standing along with your fee. o/w they will register you as an agent and it will cost an additional $100 to register later as an attorney.

257 scruffNo Gravatar July 22, 2009 at 10:56 pm

Responding to an earlier post, the reason that subsections (b), (c), and (d) of 35 USC 102 are called statutory bars is because while the invention might be novel, there are statutory provisions in place to bar the applicant from gaining a patent by virtue of his own acts (selling/using the invention, etc.). In this sense, the invention might satisfy the fundamental aspects of patentability (novelty, usefulness, and nonobviousness), but the applicant will still lose patent rights.

Subsections (a), (e), and (g) of 35 USC 102 are different because they are true provisions of novelty. If an application is rejected under one of these categories, the invention is not novel and therefore falls short of meeting the patentability requirements. Thus, the novelty rejections are more fundamental than the statutory bars in the sense that they are relevant to virtually any patent system.

The practical difference is that the novelty provisions (102 (a), (e), and (g)) are triggered by events taking place BEFORE THE INVENTION. This particular date is quite confusing because the provisional inventive date is the filing date (because this is the constructive reduction to practice date), unless the applicant can prove an earlier date of conception and actual reduction to practice (in a NAFTA or WIPO country).

The statutory bar provisions (102 (b), (c), (d)) all have to do with the applicant’s FILING DATE. Unfortunately, the MPEP doesn’t seem to stress this enough.

Incidentally, 35 USC 102 (f) doesn’t really fall under either category. Or perhaps it falls under both…

Reply

258 triedandtestedNo Gravatar July 23, 2009 at 2:09 pm

Font size in the actual exam – Does any one know if it is big enough for comfortable reading? The PLI material exam on the CD has too small a font, just curious

Reply

259 DJNo Gravatar July 23, 2009 at 2:48 pm

It is big enough. The contrast on the exam is horrible, I wish the fonts were bolder. The letters blend into the background. I have had to read one question 3 x. The words don’t stand out well on the background

Reply

260 triedandtestedNo Gravatar July 23, 2009 at 7:17 pm

Thanks DJ – my eyesight isn’t the best and reading from a computer screen is somewhat of an issue for me.

Reply

261 bcphungNo Gravatar July 24, 2009 at 11:52 am

Dear All:

Does anyone know the answer of the question relating to ” Clock Fan Lamp ”

I appreciate your comments and hints
Thanks
BCphung

Reply

262 scruffNo Gravatar July 27, 2009 at 11:15 am

Is it true the current patent bar exam uses the 4th revision of the 8th edition of the MPEP and not subsequent versions? I know each chapter of MPEP E8R4 is available separately on the MPEP’s website, but they’re not linked. i.e., you can’t get to any chapter from the Table of Contents (this is not the case for MPEP E8R7)

Reply

263 triedandtestedNo Gravatar July 27, 2009 at 6:10 pm

Repeat questions from my exam

Mario Lepieux,
Moon Dust
Tribell
Markush group – R is …

will add more as I remember

Reply

264 triedandtestedNo Gravatar July 27, 2009 at 6:23 pm

Door handle repeated too (amend by removing “means for clause” is the answer

Reply

265 VinNo Gravatar August 3, 2009 at 1:57 pm

Took the exam few days back, missed bt 6 points, was disappointed. Here are the things I remember:
- 10-15 repeats from 2002/2003 exams
- spanish phone
- Lipgloss/gag gift – 102(b)
- German PCT
- Fax used for sending PCT papers
- 102(e) based on PCT filing, refer to chapter 700 examples
- last date for priority claiming based on IA filing
- supplemental oath/decl treated as amendment in reissue
- factual inquiries – 2100
- claim counting – ans 147
- Appeals – lot more questions than I anticipated, this is what surprised me & had to put in lot of time. Some cases I remember are facts when appl. goes to BPAI, then back to examiner & so on.
- Interferences – 2-3 Qs
- Duty of discl. – does corp. has duty to disclose? no.

Reply

266 cindyNo Gravatar August 4, 2009 at 8:58 am

Hi Vin,
do you remember what kind of interference questions were in the exam? There are really not many entries about interference questions on this site.
Thanks.

Reply

267 OSU BuckNo Gravatar August 4, 2009 at 5:25 pm

I just got back from the exam, and I passed it. I want to contribute to this site because it was an enormous help to me in my preparations. I did not purchase any commercial course. All I did was read the study guides on this website for each section of the MPEP. I paid special attention to Chapters 700, 2100, 1200, 1800, and the rules. I should add that my dad is a patent attorney, so I was able to discuss the concepts with him. As other posters reccommended, I knew the 2003 and 2002 tests cold. I memorized all the questions that this site identified as repeats for the 2000-2001 tests, but I didn’t look at them beyond that. I also didn’t look at the tests prior to 2000.

In terms of material that I saw on this exam, I had between 15-20 repeats:
-Moondust
-Tribell
-Mario Lepiux (only the first of the two questions from that fact pattern)
-Japan – 45 days
-Markush
-diff. claim counting question (I wrote 8) -Australia pct
-door handle
-Japanese application
-Best mode
-Piecemeal question

in terms of other questions, there were 2 questions regarding what is required for getting a provisional date, a question about fraud, one about rapidity, nothing about death of inventor, several 102(e) questions 9both of which I had to check the additional info underneath the flow chart, a question about what is needed fto get the 30 month date for the PCT.

I’ll post more later if I remember more. it’s kind of blur right now.

In terms of searching, I had a relatively new computer and its exactly like using the Adobe 5 version, except you can only access one section at a time.

Good luck to everyone.

Reply

268 cindyNo Gravatar August 5, 2009 at 2:11 pm

Hi OSU Buck,
Congratulations on your pass. Do you remember more about the Australia pct question? There is some discrepency in people’s opinions on this website. Some said it’s a complete submission. Someone said it’ll be abandoned. Maybe you can add the freshest version on that.
Thanks.

Reply

269 VinNo Gravatar August 5, 2009 at 1:49 am

Cindy,

I dont recollect the interference Qs, I had to put in few minutes of search to get the possible answer. Basically I had never focused much on this chapter & 2-3 Qs wasnt something that one can let go.

Reply

270 JusT passedNo Gravatar August 6, 2009 at 5:47 pm

Are you Vinayak who posted a few times here?

What went wrong on your exam? Was this your first time?

Reply

271 JohnsonNo Gravatar August 6, 2009 at 12:18 am

If anyone is looking for Patent Bar study materials, I’ve put up all my materials for sale on ebay. I passed about 2 months ago.

The materials include the PLI patent bar review course, some bullseye materials, and a couple patbar.com books. All the included items are described in detail on the ebay page.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=110421599130

Reply

272 JusT passedNo Gravatar August 6, 2009 at 5:44 pm

Hi,

I am selling my PLI materials. I passed a few days ago. I only have a copy of the PLI CD’s which I bought from a colleague. Please make me an offer.

Reply

273 passed!No Gravatar August 6, 2009 at 6:16 pm

just passed yesterday, wanted to give a little back as well.
firstly, i did not study much (wanted to study more, but got bogged down with work/life and didn’t have a chance to). here’s what i did:
- read the free patent bar outline
- went through the 2002 and 2003 tests
- reviewed all the repeat questions listed on this site
- paid particular attention to the oct 03 repeats til i knew them cold
- i also practiced searching the mpep with acrobat 5 a day or 2 before the exam

in the exam, i got probably about 20% verbatim repeats (some listed below). my strategy was to breeze through these to save time for the rest of the questions. there were many questions like: ‘which of the following is not a requirement for a 102 rejection’ or ‘which of the following is required to get a filing date’, etc. (of course more obscure than my examples). the answers were basically word for word from the MPEP, usually from the same section/paragraph. for almost every question i did not know immediately, i went to the index to find the appropriate MPEP chapter (if i could not immediately recognize it), then went to the appropriate chapter and searched for a few key words from each answer choice. most of the time, i found the key section/paragraph and was able to answer the question.
if you are able to get through the repeats quickly, and navigate/search the MPEP fairly efficiently, you should be able to answer all the questions in the given time.

my repeats:
- mirror (parallel/perpendicular conflict)
- 1.131, 1.132 affidavits
- germany, costa rica, and sweden nationals filing PCT in USPTO
- spanish phone – design
- small entity status (refund)
- broom
- electric fan
- door handle
- investigating deceptive intent
- best mode
- multiplicity of claims
- mario lepuix (canadian printed publication)
- piecemeal
- smith laminate
- 34.9% – 35% obviousness
- district ct. decisions not binding
- dead inventors (several q’s)
- no certificate of mailing from foreign country
- japan 45 days
- lancer toothbrush
- copper substrate
- bloc – synthetic z (cancer cure)
- smith DRAM
- tribell
- late IDS when client knew about prior art
- parking meter
- smith over jones appeal

additionally:
- 2 questions on what you need in order to get a PCT filing data
- filing a 2nd amendment after advisory action
- maintenance fee (know that if you are late in paying maintenance fee, you must also pay the surcharge, can’t delay surcharge payment until later)
- know what does/doesn’t constitute offer of sale
- know what elements need to be filed in an accelerated prosecution application
- reissue divisional
- if you file app. with no claim, you can convert it to provisional to preserve priority date
- as others have mentioned, several on appeals, on topics like new grounds for rejection by board

i’ll probably think of more and post as i remember
thanks again and good luck to all!

Reply

274 OSU BuckNo Gravatar August 6, 2009 at 7:30 pm

Cindy,

If I remember correctly, the Australia PCT question involved an incomplete submission to the national stage, including just the application and fee, but no oath, etc.

Reply

275 cindyNo Gravatar August 10, 2009 at 9:07 am

HI OSU Buck,
Some people said the application will be abandoned, some people said the application is qualified as the national phase entry. Do you remember the specific call and the options for this question? thanks.

Reply

276 LawStudentNo Gravatar August 7, 2009 at 7:09 pm

What is the door handle question that everyone keeps mentioning? Is that the one from the October 2003 exam where the answer has the word “knob” in it.

Reply

277 Don't get flaggedNo Gravatar August 10, 2009 at 7:55 pm

Be careful about how you go about selling you used Patent Bar material. Read

http://des.uspto.gov/Foia/ReterivePdf?system=OED&flNm=0133_MOR_2007-03-01

Somebody from a patent bar review course informed the PTO that the person, who had passed the patent bar, was violating copyright laws by selling their material on ebay. This person lost on appeal because of procedural issues, but you don’t want to be denied admission to the PTO because of selling your materials.

Here’s more background info…

http://www.intelproplaw.com/ip_forum/index.php?topic=3422.0

Reply

278 cindyNo Gravatar August 11, 2009 at 9:47 am

I think this person made an illegal copy of the DVDs and sold them on ebay. that’s why he violated the copyright law.

Don’t know whether seeling used but original PLI or PRG material will be an violation though.

Reply

279 cindyNo Gravatar August 11, 2009 at 9:48 am

Isn’t selling used (but original) PLI material like selling old textbooks?

280 Tech PasserNo Gravatar August 11, 2009 at 5:10 pm

I would just like to say thanks to everybody who has posted on this site. It was a tremendous help and instilled me with much confidence before I took the test for the first time last week and passed it. I would like to do my part, like others have, and write about my experience:

I did not spend money on study materials. I read the study guide from freepatentbar.com and made my own notes. I took all the exams from 2000-2003 over and over again until I was able t o score 95+ on all of them. When I went through the answers, I went to the MPEP sections and read them. The important thing is to understand the concepts and the answers, not just memorize the questions. Then I was fortunate enough to find this website and I reviewed the past questions a few times. When I took the test, probably 60-70% of the questions I had seen before in some form or another, many of them verbatim (maybe 25). Here are the ones I can remember:

- mirror (parallel/perpendicular)
- tribell
- smith DRAM
- titanium baseball
- japan 45 days
- piecemeal
- amending the abstract (ISA)
- velcro
- what an assignee not of record can sign (small entity)
- australia PCT
- lancer toothbrush
- door handle
- when does jurisdiction pass to board in appeal (affidavit question)

I’ll post more if I can think of any. I really do appreciate all the posts I’ve seen on this site, so if anybody has any questions on the test or my study methods, I’d be more than happy to answer them.

Good luck to all of you taking the test in the future!

Reply

281 Tech PasserNo Gravatar August 11, 2009 at 5:16 pm

Just remembered a couple more:

- moondust
- Y and Z (cancer treatment)

You should really get used to searching the MPEP. That helps quite a bit, especially if you can know where the information is most likely to be found and are adept at using the Find function. The software is a little slower than what you probably have on your computer, but it’s not so slow that it’ll take up all your time. I finished the morning session in two hours and the afternoon in 1:45, and I felt so confident that I ended my sessions early and ended up spending less than five hours total at the testing center.

Reply

282 irrationalNo Gravatar August 14, 2009 at 1:33 am

just passed today on my first try! Couldn’t have done it without all the helpful tips on this site. Here are a few of the questions I remember from today:

XYZ assignee
lip gloss
Spanish phone
mirror (parallel/perpendicular)
japan 45 days
piecemeal
smith DRAM
Y and Z
copper substrate
claim counting
ABCD/BCDE
Laurel Abbot Hardy
hairgel
Indefinite Claim using ‘high’
- 34.9% – 35% obviousness
Death of inventor

I saw many repeats from old exams, mostly from Oct 03 AM and PM. I had to look up quite a few of the questions on the MPEP from 1800, 1400, 2200.

Good luck to anyone taking it soon!

Reply

283 CCCNo Gravatar August 14, 2009 at 3:13 am

Irrational,
Thanks. How about 1200 Appeal questions? Many?

Reply

284 irrationalNo Gravatar August 14, 2009 at 3:52 pm

Yes I remember there being several Appeal questions. There was one or two concerning the Board giving a new ground of rejection.

285 LawStudentNo Gravatar August 16, 2009 at 6:49 pm

I just passed on Saturday.

I had 8 appeals questions on my test and probably 12 PCT. So be sure to know those areas of the MPEP really well.

Reply

286 CCCNo Gravatar August 16, 2009 at 11:41 pm

LawStudent,

Do you recall any of the appeal or PCT? I haven’t been studying these two chapters much and my exam is coming up in 48 hours.

Thanks.

Reply

287 First TimeNo Gravatar August 18, 2009 at 7:51 pm

just passed today. first time!

In addition to all the normal repeat questions..my exam is practically summed up by the person named “passed!” posted on Aug 6th 2009.

In addition during the AM:
-I had like 4 or 5 oath/declaration questions dealing with death/legally incapable inventor…who can sign? so know MPEP 409 pretty well.
-one 37 CFR 1.99 question

PM: Appeals, Reissues, and PCT’s!!! (review at break if you can)
-can you amend/file to amend during chapter 1 of PCT application dealing with specs and ommitted drawings that have been orginally claimed?
-disclaimers…who can sign? (MPEP 1490)
-correction of inventorship in a reissues
-103 stuff

Reply

288 HookEmNo Gravatar August 19, 2009 at 2:05 am

Just passed last week on my first try! Would have posted earlier, but like one poster said, had to celebrate, and let off some steam. Anyways, I’ve got to give back, so here goes. My preparation consisted of the PLI materials and THIS WEBSITE. I basically studied for the last 4 weeks full time, and before that for about 3 weeks just glancing at stuff. I also had the bullseye outline material, but didn’t look at it too much.

After I finished listening to PLI CD’s, I started using the patware software to take old tests repeatedly, in addition to the PLI exercises. I only really worked on the 02 and 03 tests. The first time I took them cold, I was getting around 60%. The next time it jumped to 80-90%. Basically, once you do the questions once, it’s not hard to memorize them. Just look at the questions constantly and it’s not too hard.

My test was very very similar to “irrational’s” above. Like others have noted on here, the tests lately have been very focused on Appeals (1200) and PCT (1800) questions. Also, don’t get too stressed about 102(e) because the fact patters are all very similar to the 700 flowcharts which help a TON! Look over those closely. I must have had close to 35-40 repeats on the test, so that was nice. Also my morning section felt way more difficult than the afternoon one. I remember feeling iffy after the first part, but don’t get discouraged. This most likely means there are a bunch of beta questions because the second half, I felt like a crushed it. Anyways here are some of the questions I can remember… Enjoy and Goodluck!

- Velcro
- mirror (parallel/perpendicular conflict)
- 1.131, 1.132 affidavits
- germany, costa rica, and sweden nationals filing PCT in USPTO
- no ownership required for small entity status
- door handle
- investigating deceptive intent
- claim counting (147)
- piecemeal
- smith laminate
- dead inventors (several q’s)
- no certificate of mailing from foreign country
- japan 45 days
- lancer toothbrush
- bloc – synthetic z (alleviate pain/cancer cure
- smith DRAM
- tribell
- late IDS when client knew about prior art
- parking meter
- smith over jones appeal
- Larel Abbot Hardy
- Lots of Correction of Inventorship
- hairgel
- Titanium baseball (july 4th)
- 5 steps to cross road
- Supplemental Oath as amendment
- Jon to John (variation of which I think ADS was the answer)

Hope this helps, and I am also trying to sell my used materials for pretty cheap. Let me know at oo7swoosh@gmail.com. Thanks!

Reply

289 how come?No Gravatar August 22, 2009 at 1:18 pm

Preliminary pass and received letter which says fail?

What should I do? Help!!!

Reply

290 Ch333No Gravatar August 23, 2009 at 12:18 am

Did they tell you a score when you took to the test or did they just say you passed?

What was your final score when you got the letter?

Reply

291 how come?No Gravatar August 23, 2009 at 12:57 am

The letter said 68%. But Prometric’s printout said “the preliminary result shows that you passed the USPTO reg exam for patent agent / patent attorney”.

I am going to call the number on the letter and go to Prometric tomorrow. This is shit, really shit.

292 Ch333No Gravatar August 25, 2009 at 5:55 pm

Did your Prelim Pass letter have a “Candidate’s USPTO ID” on it?

293 amydNo Gravatar August 22, 2009 at 2:11 pm

how come?…wow, i’ve never heard that happen. sux to be you

Reply

294 JQNo Gravatar August 22, 2009 at 2:47 pm

Hello,

Apologies if this question has already been asked before but where can I obtain a PDF, searchable copy of the MPEP? Is the best way to buy it from the USPTO website? Thanks in advance!

JQ

Reply

295 Ch333No Gravatar August 22, 2009 at 8:46 pm

You can download them free from USPTO:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/mpep.htm
Look to the bottom of the page do download them in a zip package. They will be separated by chapters, but that is how you take the test so just get used to it.

Reply

296 JQNo Gravatar August 22, 2009 at 9:05 pm

Thanks! :)

Reply

297 Ch333No Gravatar August 24, 2009 at 10:41 am

I take it tomorrow. Any last minute advise?

Reply

298 KBNo Gravatar August 25, 2009 at 5:47 pm

I just mailed in my application to take the patent bar under the qualifying courses option (I don’t qualify by degree). Does anyone know about how long it takes to get a response of whether I can sit for the exam or not?

I want to start studying, but don’t want to waste my time if i can’t take the test.

Reply

299 Ch333No Gravatar August 25, 2009 at 9:23 pm

I had a major that was too new be listed (Information Technology accredited by ABET – i.e. an engineering degree), so I was unsure if they would even allow me to take the test or make me take more classes.
It took the PTO the full 4 weeks (the time before you can call and inquire your status) to hear back from them. On the other hand, my friend, who is a EE found out in a little over a week.

I didn’t start studying until I knew I could take it. I studied full-time for a month, but I passed (today).

Hope this helps.

Reply

300 KBNo Gravatar August 25, 2009 at 9:40 pm

Thanks for responding! I think I might be in a similar situation as you then – my major, bioengineering, is not listed, so I have to qualify by classes, and that is a little iffy, depending on which of my ‘engineering’ classes they will take.

301 cindyNo Gravatar August 26, 2009 at 8:46 am

Hi Ch333,
First of all, congratulations on your passing the exam. Do you remember any new questions appearing on your exam? I will take the exam in less than two weeks. What should I do for the last two week preparation?

Thanks.

302 Ch333No Gravatar August 26, 2009 at 10:37 am

Cindy,

There was nothing really new that Irrational and HookEm didn’t list. There were 5-6 appeal questions and 3-4 Death to the inventor questions. There was also 3-4 questions on IDSs. I counted 15-20 repeats in the morning and about 15in the afternoon. No PCT questions till the afternoon.

For the week before my test, I redid the 2003 tests (if you know them well, they only take an hour each), took a few random tests (Scored in the 80’s), and studied all the questions on this site (“Exam Questions and Concept” and “repeat questions”.) I didn’t take any tests before Oct 02 because of time and I don’t think the test as a whole is that helpful, but I did know all the repeat questions from those tests. My worst score I ever got was from the PLI May 2001 test – I think it was because the MPEP has changed a little since then and it was early on in my studies.

Another thing that is helpful is that I used a “cheat sheet”. Before the test, you take a 15 minute tutorial. The tutorial really only takes 3 minutes, but you can use the time to make a cheat sheet. (http://freepatentbar.com/study_material/FreePatentBar.com%20Cheat%20Sheet.pdf ). Just to warn you, they didn’t give me scratch paper, but a laminated sheet of yellow paper that have a lot of writing on the top 1/3 and a grid on the bottom (30 lines). The sheet was identical front and back and they gave me two sheets. As you know dry-erase pens aren’t finely pointed so you might need to skip a line and use font and back of both sheets.
I thought it was a cruel joke because I am left-handed and the pens kept dying on me (I went through 5-6 of them).

At the break, the computer just goes into a 60 minute optional count-down that you can end early if you like. If you come back early, you can erase your cheat-sheet from the first half and make a second one for the PM portion of the test. There is plenty of time before each half to prep and get ready.

I hope this helps. Let me know if you have more questions. Good luck!!!

303 Tech PasserNo Gravatar September 10, 2009 at 11:47 am

KB

Just an FYI, I had the same situation as you, and so they had to go by my courses. They took so long to write me back that I ended up calling them to find out what was taking so long. It turns out they can take up to SIX weeks to get word back to you, and I got my acceptance on the very last day of that time period. Very frustrating.

Anyway, you shouldn’t worry. The most important credits are the physics courses and basic engineering principles. You should be fine.

Reply

304 cindyNo Gravatar August 26, 2009 at 3:25 pm

Thank you Ch333. this is helpful. I am really tired of the studying. Cannot wait for the exam.

Reply

305 Ch333No Gravatar August 26, 2009 at 5:59 pm

As with everything in the patent office, the 3 month window started with the mail date of the letter authorizing me to take the test.

Then it’s just when the prometric site is available.

Reply

306 KBNo Gravatar August 26, 2009 at 5:39 pm

How long is the wait between the time you receive your allowance to take the test, and the earliest date you can take the test? I know it will depend on the test site, but is it usually within a few days, or few weeks, etc?

Anyone else have comments about how long the OED response took to tell them whether they could sit for the test (based on classes, rather than major)?

Thanks!

Reply

307 cindyNo Gravatar August 27, 2009 at 8:33 am

it took me 5 weeks to get the letter. i registered for the test about two days after I finally received the conformation letter. There is a confirmation code you need from the letter to be able to register with prometric test center.

Reply

308 cindyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 10:08 am

Can someone help me explain this following question (april 2002, pm, #27)? The answer is (C). However I don’t understand why the provisional 102(e) rejection works here. Application X and Y claim the same invention using identical language. Is it a statutory double patenting bar? Thank you.

=====================
27.Adams filed Application X on March 1, 2001. Beth filed application Y on May 1, 2001. Neither application has been published. Applications X and Y are copending and commonly assigned. Earlier filed application X claims the same invention as claimed in application Y using identical language. In accordance with the MPEP, which of the following actions should the examiner or assignee follow?
(A)The claims to the same invention in application Y should be rejected under 35 USC 102(a) as being anticipated by application X.
(B) The claims to the same invention in application Y should be rejected under 35 USC 102(b) as being anticipated by application X.
(C)The claims to the same invention in application Y should be rejected under 35 USC 102(e) as being provisionally anticipated by application X.
(D)The common assignee should file a terminal disclaimer in application Y to avoid any question of double patenting.
(E) The claims to the same invention in application Y should be rejected under 35 USC 102(e) as being anticipated by application X.

Reply

309 CatDaVincyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 12:34 pm

706.02(f)(2)

Reply

310 cindyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 1:36 pm

This is exactly where I got confused. The definition of provisional 102(e) rejection is: If an ealier file, copending, and unpublished U.S. patent application discloses subject matter which would anticipate the claims in a later filed pending U.S. application which has a different inventive entity, the examiner sould dtermine whether a provisional 102(e) rejection of the later filed application can be made.

102(e) rejection should be only used when the earlier filed application discloses but not claims the same subject matter…

My question about #27 (april 2002 pm) was why provisional 102(e) rejection was used in the situation where the earlier application claimed the same invention using identical language.

311 Ch333No Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 1:50 pm

Cindy,

This is my take, for what it’s worth.

The short answer to your questions is that “C” is the best answer of the bunch. You will find that on the patent test-you are picking the best answer, not always the correct answer.
A,B and E are wrong because they don’t acknowledge the common ownership. D is wrong because a terminal disclaimer won’t correct statutory-type double patenting. So you are left with C. The provisional rejection allows application Y to amend their claims to be different before the first office action because they have access to application X (i.e. C is not wrong, while A, B, D, and E are clearly wrong.)

312 cindyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 4:03 pm

Thank you Ch333. It makes sense to me now.

Reply

313 CatDaVincyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 5:38 pm

Cincy,
are you sure it’s #27 april 2002pm session?
sorry i just can’t find it there

Reply

314 CatDaVincyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 6:10 pm

it’s actually oct 2002 pm and this is the explanation from j white

“27. The better rejection would be same invention double patenting. But that is not among the answers, so the next best thing is a provisional 102(e) rejection that accomplishes the same thing. Answer C sets forth the correct procedure.”

d/n help too much but this is what the guru says

Reply

315 cindyNo Gravatar August 28, 2009 at 6:27 pm

thank you for the clarification.

Reply

316 cindyNo Gravatar September 3, 2009 at 9:54 am

Does any one know why answer (C) is not right in the following question (Oct-2002-pm, #33)?
============================

33.Xavier files a complete first reply exactly 10 weeks after the mailing date of a final Office action that sets a 3 month shortened statutory period for reply. An Examiner’s Amendment is necessary for the purpose of placing the application in condition for allowance. Which of the following statements is true?
(A) If Xavier gives authorization for the Examiner’s Amendment exactly 2 months after his reply, the application will be allowed.
(B) Authorization for the Examiner’s Amendment may be made at any time within 6 months of Xavier’s reply to avoid abandonment of the application..
(C) Unless Xavier gives authorization for the Examiner’s Amendment within the 3 months shortened statutory period for reply, the application will be abandoned.
(D) If Xavier gives authorization for the Examiner’s Amendment exactly 2 months after his reply, the application will be abandoned unless accompanied by a proper petition and fee for an extension of time.
(E) Abandonment of the application will be avoided if Xavier gives authorization for
the Examiner’s Amendment any time within 6 months of the mail date of a final Office action. No extension of time need be filed if Xavier gives the authorization between 3 months and 6 months after the Office action.

Reply

317 CDVNo Gravatar September 4, 2009 at 1:26 am

a complete first reply to a final Office action has not been filed?

Reply

318 richNo Gravatar September 13, 2009 at 1:21 pm

The three month shortened statutory reply can be extended up to six months. Abandonment happens after six months.

Reply

319 SpecificationNo Gravatar September 4, 2009 at 9:21 am

I guess the CFR is not provided during the exam. Just the MPEP, right? Also, those who passed, could you share how much time you spent studying for the exam?

Reply

320 Ch333No Gravatar September 4, 2009 at 10:05 am

The CFR and 35 USC Sections are in the appendix of the MPEP on the test. Also, I spent about 200 hours studying, but passed it on my first attempt. You need 150 hours at a minimum.

Reply

321 SadMattNo Gravatar September 4, 2009 at 2:54 pm

I just took the test today and failed with 65%. What did me in is I didn’t have enough practice in the international/PCT questions… and there were tons! As far as repeats from available tests, I would say I had no more than 8 from the 02 and 03 tests.

I didn’t take the test lightly, but I could have put in more effort to. I studied for about 50 hours, and will put in at least 100 before I take it again in April. Good luck to everyone!

Reply

322 SadMattNo Gravatar September 4, 2009 at 2:58 pm

too*. My brain is shot!

Reply

323 KeithNo Gravatar September 4, 2009 at 9:35 pm

I took my exam on August 19th and failed with 68%. I was not strong enough in PCT and that cost me the exam. There were about 15-20% repeats. Good luck to everyone!

Reply

324 DanNo Gravatar September 5, 2009 at 2:26 pm

Does anyone know what fees you need to pay to retake the exam? Is it just the $150 prometrics fee (and just signing up like the first time)? Or do you need to pay another 200 to the PTO as well?

Thanks!

Reply

325 KeithNo Gravatar September 5, 2009 at 8:02 pm

Dan,
You need to pay $240 for PTO and $150 prometrics fee to retake the exam.

Reply

326 DanNo Gravatar September 6, 2009 at 2:53 pm

Too bad… Thanks, Keith.

Reply

327 RebelNo Gravatar September 8, 2009 at 9:49 pm

I’m taking the PatBar next Tuesday. I’ve take the ‘01 and ‘02 test and will start on the 03′ tests tomorrow. My test scores have gradually gotten better after every test and I think its 1) I’m seeing the repeats and 2) I’m finding key phrases in the questions/answers to help me search in the electronic MPEP and are leading to the verbatim answers. I was wondering if the questions/answers for recent test takers are the same format (some of the answers are verbatim) as the ‘01, ‘02, and ‘03 test?

Thanks. The site is helping a lot.

Reply

328 cindyNo Gravatar September 9, 2009 at 9:22 am

I just passed the patent bar exam yesterday on my first try. Thank you so much for this wonderful website.

Nothing in the test really suprised me.
I spent 90 min to finish the morning session. There were about 5 repeats vertatim and a couple of the reported PCT and appeal questions. So I knew the afternoon session will be harder.

The afternoon session was more difficult with all sorts of new questions. Fortunatly I have visited this website daily for 2 months. So I have seen most of the questions reported by past test takers. They were new, but they were managable. The last question was the tribell repeat.

I spent more than 500 hours total in 6 months in my study. So I am well prepared. I started looking up the legal terms in the dictionary. With the help of the PLI homestudy material and Bullseye, I started getting into the mood. I read the MPEP a lot since that’s the only way I can understand the legal lingo. So I am quite familiar with all the chapters and where to find answers.

The week before the test, I did the 2002/2003 four exams for the forth time and got 100% accuracy in each of them. The Saturday before the exam, I went through the new questions reported here. And for Sunday and Monday (labor day) i just relaxed and took it easy.

I also went to the test center a few days before the test to take a look. The test center i chose had a cafeteria on the first floor. So I had warm meals for both breakfast and lunch.

The day of the test, I arrived at 7:30am. I had breakfast and coffee and started walking around the office park. Meanwhile, I went through the topics of different chapters in my mind. I took the 60min break for lunch. Again, i took a walk after lunch. It helped me to clear my mind and concentrate in the afternoon.

The way i did my answer sheet was quite effactive.
I devided the paper in half (left and right). And then devided each half into 5 different sessions. So there would be total of 10 sessions. And each session contained 5 questions. I assigned each session (5 questions) 15 minutes. I drew a line after each session. This helped me to keep track with my time. If I was spending too much time on one question, I’d just mark it and come back later.

It’s a difficult test. But it’s definitely managable. I enjoyed the time I studied for it. It reminded me of college. I am glad I am still capable of concentrating on things after I left grad school for almost 7 years. This summer was very unevently. Since I spent most of the weekends in the library. But it’s all worthy it now.

Key to success:
1, make sure know 2002/2003 questions cold.
2, visit this website at least once a day 2 months (or even 3, 4 months) before the exam. Read other people’s post and look up answers.
3, check out the test center before hand to know where the bathroom is; whether there is food court or cafeteria on site; meet the staff and introduce yourself; see how cold the test room to decide whether a sweater is needed.
4, arrive early on the testing day. eat a full breakfast. use the bathroom. keep a steady pace when taking the test. don’t panic if you cannot find answer. Just move on.

Just believe in yourself. You can do it.

Reply

329 SamanthaNo Gravatar September 9, 2009 at 4:14 pm

Hello,

I am currently in law school and plan on taking the patent bar by next spring. I wanted to start studying now, since I have a lot going on with being in school at the same time.

I was wondering if anyone can suggest what is the best material to study from? I never get a straight answer. Some people say PLI is better than the PRG or vice versa. Please Help!

Please feel free to give me any other advice or suggestions!

Reply

330 BalokNo Gravatar September 16, 2009 at 9:54 am

I received a preliminary grade of “pass” (still haven’t gotten my official letter) when I took the exam two weeks ago, and I didn’t use any study materials other than the 2003 exams available at the USPTO web site, the MPEP, and this web site. The main trick is to know what you’re likely to see on the exam. Since they ask a lot of repeat questions, make sure that you know as many questions (and answers!) from as many previous exams as possible. There is generally a lot of emphasis on 102/103/112, so make sure that you know what are grounds for rejection under each paragraph of those sections, and how to overcome claim 102/103/112 rejections. There tend to be lots of questions on appeals and reissues, so make sure that you know the basics. What I found most helpful was generally knowing my way around the MPEP. Since the “on-line” version available at the exam only allows you to search within the chapter that you have open, it’s very helpful to know in which chapter the information you need is likely to be found.

Reply

331 JusT passedNo Gravatar September 9, 2009 at 4:57 pm

Samantha,

I used an older version of PLI to pass the exam two months ago. I selling my material if you are interested in buying. You do not need the most recent PLI version to pass the exam; an older version will do just fine and will save you money as well. I originally bought the materials in early 2008.

Also, I made my own outlines of the material which I am also selling.

Reply

332 SamanthaNo Gravatar September 9, 2009 at 7:43 pm

JusT passed,

I have actually been looking around to buy some patent review materials. How much are you selling your PLI materials for and how much are you selling your outlines for?

Thanks,
Samantha

Reply

333 JusT passedNo Gravatar September 10, 2009 at 11:30 am

Samantha: I’m selling everything for 500 (includes PLI: CDs, DVDs, binder; and my own outline). I have my outlines associated with each chapter of the PLI materials. I do not have a hard copy of the MPEP (at my old apt), but if you really need it, I can arrange for it to be shipped to me for about 10 bucks. I actually don’t recommend you study from the hard copy of the MPEP (I never used it) because you will only have the PDF version on the actual exam. So, it’s best you get accustomed to reading/studying from a PDF version of the MPEP.

Also, if you want, I can send you a hard copy of questions and answers of all the past exams (until 98) on this site for an extra 50 bucks. But again, I don’t recommend using a physical copy of the exams, unless, you are at beginning stages of studying and want to make notes next to the old exam questions while you review.

Let me know I will give you my email address.

Thanks

334 Tech PasserNo Gravatar September 10, 2009 at 11:52 am

If you are self-disciplined and good at reading material and taking notes, you shouldn’t have to spend any money. Just get a copy of the MPEP, use the free study guide on this website, and take all the practice tests you can get your hands on, especiall 01-03. I didn’t spend any money on study materials and passed on the first try.

However, you do need to put in the work. I studied ten hours a day for three weeks before the test. To each his/her own…..

335 JusT passedNo Gravatar September 10, 2009 at 12:48 pm

Tech Passer,

You must be really, really smart. I’d say that about 90% of people need some sort of review course. I was a law student and failed the first time, even with the PLI materials. THe second time around, I spent more time reviewing the PLI materials and taking my time to understand each concept.

You are right though, to each his/her own……it depends on what you think will work for you.

Reply

336 SamanthaNo Gravatar September 10, 2009 at 1:55 pm

JusT passed,

What version are your PLI materials? When you say PLI binder do you have books from the course or is it only one binder?

You can give me your e-mail if you want to give me more details and I will send you an e-mail.

Thanks!

Reply

337 JusT passedNo Gravatar September 10, 2009 at 2:07 pm
338 DerrickNo Gravatar September 11, 2009 at 3:17 pm

Hi, thanks for this website folks. It really made a difference. I passed on 09 09 09 the ominous date.
I guess most ppl already figured out the 3 things that are most important for passing
1. read through the chapters 700, 1200, 1400, 1800 and 2100 in the actual MPEP in full
2. know the 2002/2003 questions cold. Cold as in cold cold.
3. read through the outlines on this site, and prepare your own outline

One good tip i got for the exam from this site is to draw an A,B,C,D,E grid for the 50 questions before you start. That way you have much more control and can check which questions you have already narrowed down to 2 or 3 choices and come back to those later.

And dont panic. Even if you think that all you remember is Jerusalem Artichokes dont worry. It will come back to you in the exam. You will most likely have b/w 10 and 15% repeat questions. Given an average time of about 3.6 min to solve one question , this will save you almost 1h if you can just click and move on. So you will have all that time in addition to look up things.

Good luck all!!

Reply

339 JusT passedNo Gravatar September 11, 2009 at 4:13 pm

Hello All,

My PLI materials are still up for sale if anyone is interested.

Thanks

Reply

340 Anurag KumarNo Gravatar September 11, 2009 at 4:22 pm

Please contact me at anuragkumar@yahoo.com. I am interested.
Anu

Reply

341 samboNo Gravatar September 12, 2009 at 11:01 am

Didn’t pass, I got a preliminary score of 65%. Will try again, I used OMNIPREP patent and it is a complete joke. All they do is take the already posed old exam questions and place them in some webpage for you to take. Then they COPY word for for the “Exam Questions and Concepts” section of this website.!!! and then they claim that they have given you all the answers for the test so there is no way you can fail. Anyways I will demand my money back, and I would sue them for copying your website and making a profit from it. Next time I will use this website…

Good Luck

Reply

342 Administration TeamNo Gravatar September 15, 2009 at 11:24 am

Dear Intellectual Property Forum Readers,

Omni Learning Corporation, the publisher of OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course, strongly disagrees with the negative comments about our course posted on this message board. Our mission is to produce the highest quality patent bar course to ensure that our students achieve success on their USPTO exam. Because we are confident about the quality of our course, OmniPrep offers the best money back guarantee in the industry. Since our students’ success is our priority, we are extremely diligent about addressing all student questions and concerns. Given that 98% of our students pass the patent bar exam, we question whether these comments are real complaints, or more likely, false statements posted by a competitor. If these are real complaints, or if you have any questions regarding our course, please contact our Administration Department at: admin (AT) omnipreppatent (DOT) com.

Thank you.

Administration Team
OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course
Omni Learning Corporation

Reply

343 c@dvNo Gravatar September 17, 2009 at 9:00 pm

sambo
look
we can @ least have some positive outcome
if the statement by the omniprep

“90% of All Questions Seen on The Current Exam
Input from our team of course developers, who sit for the exam on a regular basis, and past students, who have recently passed the exam, have been combined into our NEW proprietary Question Bank, which contains 90% of all the questions that you could possibly encounter on the patent bar exam. This means that it is now IMPOSSIBLE for you to fail the exam once you have completed our course! No other course in the industry even comes close to having as many current exam questions.”

is true then y d/n u post some of the q that weren’t mentioned yet here on this site

just 1 more thing. if there’s any illegality involved i d/n wanna be breaching the law please disregard the offer

Reply

344 CharlesNo Gravatar September 14, 2009 at 11:34 pm

That’s a common complaint with Omniprep. They have a refund policy, don’t they? FWIW, I used the Bullseye Patent Bar materials linked from this website. Passed on the first try and it was much cheaper. The materials were great.

Reply

345 Administration TeamNo Gravatar September 15, 2009 at 11:23 am

Dear MyPatentBar Forum Readers,

Omni Learning Corporation, the publisher of OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course, strongly disagrees with the negative comments about our course posted on this message board. Our mission is to produce the highest quality patent bar course to ensure that our students achieve success on their USPTO exam. Because we are confident about the quality of our course, OmniPrep offers the best money back guarantee in the industry. Since our students’ success is our priority, we are extremely diligent about addressing all student questions and concerns. Given that 98% of our students pass the patent bar exam, we question whether these comments are real complaints, or more likely, false statements posted by a competitor. If these are real complaints, or if you have any questions regarding our course, please do not hesitate to contact our Administration Department at: admin (AT) omnipreppatent (DOT) com.

Thank you.

Administration Team
OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course
Omni Learning Corporation

Reply

346 patentbarNo Gravatar September 15, 2009 at 12:36 pm

I am flattered that OmniPrep has a large commercial test prep site like OmniPrep has would take the time to post a comment on a relatively small, non-profit site like mypatentbar.com. However, multiple posts containing identical content in various areas of mypatentbar.com seems to be a bit of overkill.

Although we appreciate your comments, and are at hopes that you will continue to bring to our attention any commnets that you may have, we ask that you only post one comment per topic.

Reply

347 SteveNo Gravatar September 16, 2009 at 9:27 am

OMNIPREP falsely claims they have a pass rate of 98%
According to their website:

“Pass Rate Calculation Method
Our pass rate is calculated by dividing the number of students who did not request a refund by the total number of students who have used our course to prepare for the patent bar exam. This is an extremely accurate measure of our course pass rate, given that our students have a very strong monetary incentive to let us know if they did not pass the exam.”

It is false advertising to say 98% pass, based on some probable correlation. Who knows what kind of stipulations they put on people to try not to give refunds back. The more they deny refunds, the higher the pass rate

Reply

348 Administration TeamNo Gravatar September 17, 2009 at 3:14 am

Steve,

Our refund policy is clearly explained on our website:

“Refund Procedure
In the unlikely event that you do not pass the Patent Bar Exam after completing our course, you can either request:

1. A full refund; or
2. Free lifetime access to our course until you pass the Patent Bar Exam.

To request a refund, just send us your original USPTO Official Examination Results Letter via regular mail within 30 days of your enrollment expiration date, and we’ll mail you a check for $495, no questions asked. Please send the letter to:

Refund Request
OmniPrep Patent Bar Exam Review
Omni Learning Corporation
848 N. Rainbow Blvd., # 1128
Las Vegas, NV 89107

To request lifetime access to our course, just follow the above instructions for the money back guarantee and we’ll activate your lifetime enrollment immediately upon receipt of your Results Letter.”

Thus, there are no “tricks” done to prevent students that do not pass the exam from receiving a refund, and any student that does not pass the exam has a $495 incentive to make sure that they do request a refund.

This means that our calculation method is far more accurate than the survey method used by courses such as PRG to calculate their 88% pass rate.

Steve, in the future please feel free to contact us before posting further such statements, so that we can clarify our policies for you.

Thank you.

Administration Team
OmniPrep Patent Bar Review Course
Omni Learning Corporation

Reply

349 RebelNo Gravatar September 20, 2009 at 4:44 pm

Passed the test last Tuesday. First try. I’ve been celebrating. It’s a huge relief not to have to look at that stuff several hours a day anymore.

I ABSOLUTELY could not have passed the test if it was not for this website. The “repeat questions” and “exam concept” section with everyone’s comments were the key to passing for me.

Just some bits about the test that I wanted to share.

1. Studying.

I’ve been studying since May. I put way too many hours into it because I didnt discover this site until July and didn’t know how to study.

I started out, in May, used OmniPrep. It was not helpful for me. The lecture guy should be on suicide watch cause he’s depressing. He often has to correct himself and is not clear. He’s constantly sighing and you can not help but think that he does not enjoy what he’s reading at all. He recites rule number after rule number which is not what someone who has no concept of the MPEP needs to hear at first. In my opinion, a prep course, and the learner, should be focusing on major concepts in the lectures. The details (like rule numbers) should be read later by the learner himself after he had a general idea of what he is about to read as provided by the lectures. Also, I was blown away by the similarities of the outline on this FREE website as compared $495 dollar one on OmniPrep. (This is completely coincidental that OmniPrep has recently commented on here, I was planning on expressing my concerns about their program along time ago.)

PatBar was helpful for me. The lectures, chapter readings, and example questions were very beneficial.

BUT, to pass the test, you must be familiar with the 2000-2003 old tests (right and wrong answers) and then the new repeat questions (along with student comments) provided on this website. Very very helpful.

If you haven’t taken a survey course about patents, you’ll need in excess of the recommended 120 hours, I promise. I’m talking closer to double that.

2. The Test

I would recommend learning how to search within particular chapters. I was under the impression that you were allowed to do a search of the entire MPEP with the “find” option come test day. This wasn’t the case. The “find” option is limited to finding things in individual chapters only. Therefore, I had to search the “index” to find out where a particular concept, for example “fraud,” was located and then search within that specific chapter. So, know what concepts are in what chapter.

The morning part was really tough for me. After about question 10 I was thinking “Lord, help me continuing studying so I can pass this thing next go around.” Panic. Then I got familiar conducting searches using Prometic’s electronic MPEP and the repeats started coming in, verbatim. So DO NOT give up, if the test starts off rough. Just mark an answer and come back to it. You will have time if you’ve taken the practice exams.

Lots of repeats. I probably had 40 or so from the old tests and the new ones listed under “exam concepts.” It’s a waste for me to list individually the particular questions that I had on my test. Just treat this exam like a regular law school exam where you HAVE to cover everything (old exams, exam concepts, repeats) on this website, so that when Prometric tests you on a narrower scope, so you’ll be ready.

GOOD LUCK

Reply

350 LilyHNo Gravatar September 21, 2009 at 7:07 pm

I am a loyal reader of the website and first time to post. I passed the exam on Sept. 17th! I would like to say THANK YOU to everyone who has contributed posts and exam experiences here and a BIG THANK YOU to the owner of this website for your time and dedication! I could not have passed without you guys!

Here are a few points I would like to share:

1. DO the old exams!
I went through the PLI study material first, listened to John White’s lecture whenever I can: in the car, during the walk…But I got only 50% on the mock exam. Doing the old exam really helped a lot. After I finished all the old exam, I could easily score over 90% on the PatWare practice exams.

2. Get used to the MPEP search.
Although I did all the old exams, I didn’t get many repeat questions in my test. Being able to quickly locate the subject in the question was the key to pass. When I was studying the old exams, I followed the suggestion from a friend:
No matter you know the answer or not, always go the MPEP to find the chapter and locate the answer and also read any related text.

3. Use the hint in the question to finder the answer:
Many questions mention the corresponding Rules ( 37CFR ). Go to the Rule section of MPEP. I feel that many time it was much easier to find the answer in 37CFR than in the MPEP chapters.

4. Don’t panic during the exam.
Do the easy or repeat questions first ( you don’t want to lose any easy points!). Mark the questions that you have doubts and look up the MPEP later.

5. Read the Exam Questions and Concepts in this web site. Very helpful!

Good luck!

Reply

351 richNo Gravatar October 1, 2009 at 10:33 pm

Thanks everyone for the help. Passed on September 23rd. I had questions starting April 2000 (Mario LePeiux/LeMeiux) and the “wing hat.” Potter, Jo(h)n Jones, melting point were the more prominent questions. Three dead inventors. A lot of ex parte reexam (10%), appeal (5), protest (3), PCT (10+), inventor correction (2, an absolute repeat from AM to PM), lots of 2100/700.

To calm down before I answered the first question, I pulled up 102 and read it at the start. Don’t be afraid to mark questions if you can’t answer in 60 seconds. I left an hour in each session to look up 10 or so questions. Good luck everyone.

Reply

352 SNo Gravatar October 2, 2009 at 9:34 am

I passed. The exam questions and concepts section was *extremely* helpful. Equally helpful was the advice to know 03 and 02 exams cold. There were a lot of question from these two categories. You may find the following info useful.

There was a Q asking about valid sources for a motivation to combine references. This is directly in 2143.01 (not the latest rev but in rev 4)

A Q about grounds for protest (variation of a repeat). Ans are directly in 1901.02.

A Q about correctness of double patenting rejection when there are combinations subcombs and related inventions. Ans are directly from 806.05 and 806.05(c) (rev 4)

Lip gloss Q: it seems this is NOT public use – she used it for herself.

Mirror Q: This version specifically asked about 112, par 1 rejection. Then the ans is “reflective surface” stated in original claim but not in spec. This is not new matter, but it is a 112, par 1 problem. Facts about mirror changed to reflective surface or mirror not defined as a reflective surface are NOT a problem b/c this is an inherent property. Facts about parallel and perpendicular arrangement can be a 112, par 2 problem but not a par 1 problem.

Q about Examiner’s Amd. Black ink is the wrong ans. It should be red ink.

Hair gel Q (A variation of Apr 02, PM, Q37). Facts didn’t say there was enabling disclosure. So file prior art citation may be the correct ans.

Q on 102(e) dates directly based on Ex. 5 in 700. Ans is the first line under Additional Benefit Claims.

Q about correcting priority in PCT app. You must do this within 16 mos of the CORRECT priority date. Fact pattern says that the date was submitted in the mm/dd/yyyy format but should have been dd/mm/yyyy format. Thus, Jan 4 98 is 4/1/98 and the last day to claim priority is 4/5/99 (May 4, 99). All this was a distraction. Rule also says 4 mos within filing of IA and that date (which I assume was the correct ans) was before May 4, 99.

Q about 102(e) date of PCT app filed b/f 11/29/00. There was an error in address. So the date would be when the address was corrected.

Q about perfecting priority in reissue. I don’t remember this well but there was an issue of a stmt of unavoidable delay.

The following were repeated from old exams:
Oct 03 AM: 9, 23, 26, 36, 44
Oct 03 PM: 2, 13, 21 (some variation), 41, 45
Apr 03 AM: 8, 25 (some variation), 30, 37, 44
Apr 03 PM: 13, 48 (some variation)
Apr 00 AM: 42

Reply

353 cfeigenbutzNo Gravatar October 6, 2009 at 4:07 pm

I took the exam today and passed on the first try! Most of it was a blur, but here is what I remember:

About 30 or so repeats from 2002-2003.
Lots of reexam, reissue, rce questions
maybe 5-6 PCT (several from the 10-03 exam, but with subtle differences. (Costa Rica/Sweden/German PCT)
Piecemeal
Titanium Baseball
Mirror
Velcro
Japanese Patent

Also, I made a bunch of flashcards for my ipod touch for all of the 2002-2003 exams. if anyone wants to use them, and has the iphone app called flashmybran, or an account to flashmybrain.com, i will post them under the legal section. I cant tell you how helpful it was to know the old questions. Make sure you know all the old questions!

Good Luck!

Reply

354 paulNo Gravatar October 14, 2009 at 11:43 am

hi
Please, Can u post them under the legal section in iphone flashmybrain ASAP

Thank u

Reply

355 twiredNo Gravatar October 7, 2009 at 9:58 am

Hello,
I passed the exam yesterday (2nd attempt) I took the PRG class two weeks ago and it helped me to analyze everything with intelligence.
This site was also helpful, but I recommend knowing how to analyze and not rely on memorization.

-You cannot manipulate the exam question window. So it can be a challenge to read the MPEP side by side w/ the question.

To the best of my memory :
-the adhesive layer question fact scenario was flipped and tested the use of comprising and consisting.
- 3 easy questions on when a PCT filing date is received. (when from 3 German inventor to U.S., 3 inventors from Costa Rica, (this had an answer that implied that Costa Rica was not under the PCT umbrella, which is false)
- 7 questions on changes to Appeal that had been in effect since 2004, so they were not covered in the practice exams
Get comfortable searching with the index and a general idea where to begin a search.
- 5 PCT 102(e) questions. Get comfortable looking at the flow charts in 706.02(f)(1) all different outcomes.
- Combination-subcombination (806.05a,c,d)
- 3 questions on telephone restriction practice
- 6 questions on assignment and inventorship, most were trickier facts than prior exams.
-plenty of 102/103 questions. A few on inherency. The exam had a couple of questions that were very similar in framing and answer choices yet had different outcomes.
-Mirror

Reply

356 WednesdayNo Gravatar October 7, 2009 at 5:56 pm

For those passed the exam a while ago, how long did it take you to receive the official notice? Thanks.

Reply

357 Passed a while agoNo Gravatar October 13, 2009 at 1:53 pm

I passed on May 11, 2009, and a week later I got a letter confirming my passing score from the PTO dated May 13, 2009. Then I got listed in the Gazette one month later as a person seeking registration, and I got my Reg. No. on July 8. You have to be listed in the Gazette for a period of time before you get your number, but the deadline is stated in the Gazette. Once the deadline passes and if nobody contests your registration, you get your number.

However, I’ve read about people that pass the patent bar and then get a letter confirming that they passed, but in the letter the PTO is requesting additional info. If this happens then it will take longer to get your Reg. No.

Reply

358 Passed...No Gravatar October 12, 2009 at 7:07 pm

Passed with PLI first time.. but couldn’t have done it without this site and knowing some of the new questions. Thanks to everyone who contributed. Here is my contribution back:

PTO has stepped this thing up a notch. The morning session seemed easier. Second session had a lot of PCT which i had no clue about.

Here are the questions I got, while I still remember:

Titanium Baseball – It had some advertisement (paper) that they handed over to a museum. I went with as of the date it was indexed.

Adhesive layer question – was asked in the negative, not the way it appears in prior tests – I confirm

Appeal questions
-w/ new ground of rejection – go over this, and know the relationship between examiner and board and what happens here. I wasted time reading all this during the test.
-w/ rejected dependent claims – Answer: had to use Examiner’s amendment or let applicant rewrite b/c dependent claim REJECTION was overturned by the board.

combination/sub-combination – I still have no clue what this means, but you can find the elements in the MPEP.

US/Mexican company w/ 2 Mexican inventors (one which was a resident?) filing PCT in Spanish (there was no time to translate). Question asked whether US office could be RO? I think answer was no, b/c application was in Spanish, not English and there was not time to translate it — therefore the USPTO should send to IB, after payment of transfer fee.

Lipgloss that changes taste with each kiss – answer: i think experimental use ended and she kept using the lipgloss but not telling anyone. A: She was barred under 102(b) for public use >1 year.

Tables on a CD question – i went with the answer suggested on the board that they were not 51 pages since they were 1/2 and also you needed 2 copies.

Easy French priority question, i think his name was “Pierre.” He filed in France, patent issued then tried to file in US after more than 1 year – barred under 102(d) . Tricky b/c they had option to do 102(b) and 102(d) but it wasn’t 102(b) b/c the french application had just published before the filing.

Trade Secret question – don’t remember the fact pattern

Broom Question – with 900 claims. Answer – E, call the applicant

Piecemeal Question – question was easy just look up piecemeal in the index, then go to section. Answer is right there.

2 month rule for office action – answer: measured from mail date of Advisory Action.

Hydrocyclone – answer: the one that introduces a new method

Tom and Jo

Laurel Abbott and Hardy

Bloc Synthetic Z – answer: doesn’t matter since it has other use, relieving pain.

Moon Dust – Easy, answer: no duty to disclose

Parking Meter – answer: submit drawing w/ disclosed matter

Toy Plane with aluminum wings – answer: examiner should maintain rejection. Prior art had entire plane covered with gum wrappers, which have aluminum foil. New invention, that was rejected, had wings only covered with aluminum foil.

Smith / DRAM cell

Protest

Investigating Deceptive Intent

Question with dead inventor who assigned his interest, and died. Company now wants to continue prosecution.

Question about PCT that you had to know how long you can amend the priority. (I think it was 4 months, but not sure)

Japanse PCT – if you file a PCT designating all states but Japan can you later amend priority from a Japanse application / what’s the time frame on that. (no idea)

102(a) question – which prior art could never be a 102(a) rejection: Anwser – applicant’s patent/application, b/c it’s not by “others.”

Make sure you know why those answers are correct ie read those sections of the MPEP. I just memorized the answers and I had to do a lot of reading/searching. Some answers have been modified. There are some new questions to mentioned here so be prepared to search. It’s doable, if you pace yourself and do the questions you know first. Good Luck!

Areas that were tested heavily:

ASSIGNMENT – surprisingly
APPEAL
PCT

Reply

359 LinNo Gravatar October 12, 2009 at 7:53 pm

Which review course do you recommend? I can’t afford PLI or Barbri the expensive ones. And if anyone selling their old PLI study material, please contact me. I’m willing to buy! Thank you very much

Reply

360 ajclegalNo Gravatar October 13, 2009 at 3:57 pm

I passed 9/28 on my first attempt. I did not spend one red cent on study materials and do not believe it is necessary to do so to pass. Thanks to the mass amount of repeats, this test is pretty easy if you put in the time. Here is my .02 cents on test strategy:

1. Download this outline (it is really good) and read it over a couple of times.

2. Do ALL the old exams from 2000-2003 at LEAST twice. Not only are you learning the important concepts, but you are memorizing answers, which is key. You are also learning how to use the MPEP search function, which is also key. When the real exam came, I probably looked up answers to at least 30 questions that I wasn’t sure of. You need to be scoring at least 85-90 on each test before you are ready for the real exam. (I made an outline based upon questions that I was repeatedly getting wrong).

3. Learn all the new exam topics posted here.

4. The week before the test, read MPEP chapters 700, 1200, 1400, 1800 and 2100.

That is literally all you need to do to pass this test. As for my particular exam, I had at least 30 repeats from the 2000-2003 exams. The following commonly tested newer topics also appeared:

Tradename – VELCRO
Moondust
Tribell
Japan – 45 days
Wireless Telephone
Amending the PCT Abstract – ISA rewrites
Electric Toothbrush
Death of Inventor after he’s assigned part of invention to his atty
PCT 102(e) file date – Sweden/Costa Rica
Assignee not of record signing small entity claim
Hairgel (the answer was ex parte reexam)
MDC fee calculation
Door knob – means plus function
Titamium Baseball (Prior Art – July 4)
Mirror reflective qualities
Joe Blockhead
Piecemeal Exam
Return of Maintenance fee
Parking meter
misspelled name (Jon Jones)

I had several Q’s on new grounds of rejection by appeal board
I also had a question on telephone calls to FIU

Reply

361 LinNo Gravatar October 13, 2009 at 4:50 pm

ajclegal, I hope you don’t mind I reply to your comment.
Did you use a hardcopy of MPEP? If you don’t mind, can you share your study experience, i.e., how did you collect the study material? I do plan to study on my own as I don’t have the time and budget to attend any review course. Thank you so much in advance!

Reply

362 ajclegalNo Gravatar October 14, 2009 at 9:51 am

I just printed everything I needed off the internet, particularly this site. PLI and Barbri are complete wastes of money for the Patent Bar.

Reply

363 CarlosNo Gravatar October 14, 2009 at 5:48 pm

I just found the site the night before the exam. I failed yesterday, with a 65. But I saw at least 10 of the questions from this site on the exam.

(Moondust, piecemeal, door knob, Tribell, Japan 45 days, Mirror, Death of Inventor, etc.) This site is definitely on point.

Now I’m trying to take it again in 30 days before my window closes. For the next month I plan on reading the chapters in the MPEP, retaking all the exams (I had already taken each at least twice). And making sure I know PCT and 102(e).

The first half had alot of that and I think that’s where I slipped up at. But the second half had alot of questions from old tests and topics discussed on this site.

Reply

364 AmyNo Gravatar October 16, 2009 at 12:05 pm

Hello,

I am selling my pbar outline (based on PLI materials) and a hard copy of all exams to 2000. I am asking 45 + shipping if anyone is interested

Reply

365 LinNo Gravatar October 18, 2009 at 12:46 pm

Hi Amy,
Did you make the outline yourself?
Thanks.

Reply

366 AshNo Gravatar October 18, 2009 at 6:55 pm

Hi everybody

I am a devout reader of this website and any others that list patent questions, and an aspiring patent agent planning to sit for the bar exam in 10 days. After so many days of preparing, the million dollar question struck me..how is the job market for patent agents in this economy? I have a B.S in Computer Engg and 5 years of work exp. in the software industry. People who have posted that they passed (and if they are trying to become patent agents and aren’t law students), how do you find the scenario?

I think such questions strike at the wrong time, like now when I should be studying hard..have been wondering for a while now, but kept putting the thought away..

thanks !

Reply

367 Rolf SeichterNo Gravatar October 18, 2009 at 8:43 pm

Hi Ash, good luck with your exam, I’ll keep my fingers crossed for you!
I had passed my test in Sept last year, more an ego challenge to myself – I am 65 years old, an RF engineer of the old class, an MBA since 2006, now a Patent Agent as of Sept 2008.

After I had passed my test, I had sent out a few resumees and applications, had literally phone calls after 5 min, after sending the emails. One opportunity resulted in an excellent side job to my main job a day later, I am working since for that firm on a part time basis.

What I am trying to say: The Patent Agent job market is good, if not even great. Look up INDEED Job opportunities, a great open jobs, new jobs, web site.

Again,
Good luck
Rolf

Reply

368 AshNo Gravatar October 19, 2009 at 8:37 am

Thanks so much for the encouragement Rolf ! You put a big smile on my face early in the morning !

You must be a great person, kudos on your passing and your new job ! I shall remember what you said on my way to the testing center.

tnx again
Ash

369 SonicNo Gravatar October 19, 2009 at 4:11 pm

I really wish to thanks the people who set up this website and those who contribute to this forum. I passed the exam yesterday (Oct18, 2009) in Columbia, MD. It turned out that the over 60 exam question posted here, I encountered 15-17. Among them are:

Lip Gross
Treat secret
Inventor A claim 1-5; Inventor B claim 6-10; Reissue
Correcting PCT Applications
Mirror
Who can sign the assertion of small entity status
Black ink red ink
maintenance fee
Spanish phone
Japanese patent (more than one)
Hair gel
Death of inventor after prosecution
Piecemeal
112 6th para equivalence standard
German PCT

Those questions saved me a lot of quality time during the test.

I started to prepare for the exam from scratch on August 10th 2009 after I bought PLI study material. I firstly spent 30 days to listen to the CD, read study guide, did PLI prime questions and spent the rest days to do old exams. Everyday I invested 4 hours on it,and On weekend I could invest 6 hour a day. In the very beginning, I experienced some hard time understanding the basic. But John White’s CD did help a lot. Yet when I did old exam question for the first time, I was so frustrated. I only got 62% on 2003 Oct test and only had 40 min to check back the marked question 40 days ago. I hang in there, keep doing question..review them.. listen to CD..read PLI guide. doing more exams… I gradually progressed, after ten days, I could finish 2002 exams with a grade of lower 70% and had more than 1 hour to check back. One week ago before the exam, I got middle 70% for 2001 Oct exam with 2 hour to check. Yesterday, I finished both section in 65-70 mins with around 15 marked questions in each section and had enough time to check.

Now allow me to contribute some experience I gained in the last 70 days.

1. Learn the basic and backbone of MPEP. PLI helped a lot, especially for people without pertinent background, John White did save me a lot of time by exposing test preparer most to the part USPTO wants you to know in the exams. Later I also found out the study guide on this website are pretty good and could act as a complementary to PLI, though some chapters are not written in an organized manner.

2. Old exams. Those are flesh and blood for the exam. 2003 exams are most most valuable, then 2002 exams. For 2001 exams, I only did Oct test. If your preparation time is limited. Skip 2001 and earlier exams and focus yourself on 02-03 exams. By focus I mean you will have to go over them 2-3 times. I spent a lot of time reviewing those exams ( it is like you spend 3 hour doing one section, you will double your time reviewing them!). Old exams helped a lot in grasping the point and sharping my MPEP search skills. It turned out during exams 45-50% of questions could found sources literally in those old exams or they are just the obvious variants of the old exams. Another 10-15% question could be found on “exam question” posted on this website. Now think about this: when you go to Prometirc to take exams, among the 100 questions you are facing, only around 35-45 questions are probably new to you, among those new, 20-25 questions would be cold, I mean you could identify answers to them without looking up the MPEP. Now for the rest, 1/2-2/3 of them are warm and are easy to find answers in MPEP without painful reading. Now how many hot questions are left? You do the math.

3. MPEP. John White suggest reading chapter 2100,1800 and 700. I admit these chapters generate about 70% questions of the exams and I tried to read, but you know what, MPEP is not written for people to read (especially not for an immigrant like me!), It is written for them to look up when they feel they need to. So after spending a few night hours reading the boring chapter 2100 word by word, I gave up changed the strategy. Instead of reading inside, I started scrolling down and browsing the heading carefully. Only in some cases I read some details that appeared on the exam questions and answer choices. One mistake I had made during listening to lecture and practiced PLI Prime questions was that I sometimes forgot Patent bar exam is open book exam, I mean that I did not expose myself enough to MPEP. So upon I started to do old exams, I found out it was a huge pain to search.That is why later I started to read heading so I at least I could narrow down my search to a few paragraphs. One thing I need to point out is that old exams usually use the verbatim out of MPEP in their questions choices, which made it easy to find, but in today’s exam. They kind of tried to avoid that, so be aware!

4. The >60 questions posted on this website. If you spend one or two days reading all of them very carefully, you will find that reading will be so rewarding. Again, thanks to those who have voluntarily post those valuable questions.

Forgive my poor English if you find it is hard to read. I meant to help those future test takers no matter they are native or those whose native tongue is not English.

Lastly, I wish to sell my PLI material, I bought it early August 2009 form PLI website for $1800, I am selling them for $500, fair condition. Write to me at lcqdl@yahoo.com if interested.

Sonic

Reply

370 Marc MartinoNo Gravatar October 20, 2009 at 7:36 pm

I just got done taking the Patent Bar today for the first time…PASSED! I wanted to share my thoughts in hopes it might help others out as I did read this site and I am sure a picked up a few pointers to help me out. (I got the titanium baseball question!)

I had free PLI materials from 2001 or something. I went through all the mp3s, but I would estimate that it really only covers about 40 percent of what you are going to be tested on. Sorry, that is just the plain truth. I didn’t do any practice questions other than the actual bar exam questions. I highly recommend NOT doing any PLI or PRG or whomever practice questions because it is completely pointless. They either are too easy or cover material you aren’t going to tested on, and furthermore, they will trick you into a false sense of security on the exam and give you a shock when you realize how difficult the real exam is. You should be taking actual bar exam questions because that is what you are going to be asked and you might recognize some, which means FREE POINTS and a huge time saver.

I took the last 8 exams, so that is 800 questions. I reviewed these exams and made notes of the questions I missed and why. I did see several questions repeated, but not as much as I thought I would. Maybe 10-15 questions were repeats. However, the new questions definitely were asking about similar subject matter. Some repeats were hard to spot, as in the stress of the exam you can’t quite tell if it a straight repeat or they changed it up a bit. One question I did have was the Potter question. I read Potter and immediately skipped the question and looked for the answer with “commonly owned” it in and just moved on. Literally didn’t read it because it was pointless to waste my time trying to understand it again. Just saved 4 minutes dealing with that ridiculousness. For instance, if you have to do some massive claim counting of multiple dependents and see 147, just select it and move on. Saving time is key to do searches for other questions.

I never read 600, 700 or 2100…waste of time. You need to know how to search it, not read it. The answers are so nuanced you can NEVER learn it. I was flipping between screens trying to figure out which answer they switched a “can” or “cannot” from. You need to be able to find the answer and then compare it to the text in the MPEP.

You also need to be HIGHLY efficient at looking things up. It was a racehorse, and I literally looked up 20-30 questions for the answer. I would say I found the answer on maybe 17-20 of them and then just guessed at the rest. I ended up with about 15 minutes left over each section and ended up changing about 5 of my answers based on the new searches I did. That could have saved me.

Basically, you need to spot old repeat questions so you can not only get them correct, but save time for other questions. Also, the search function on Adobe is a bit pathetic, you have to hit the OPEN button after you have already selected the MPEP section or else it doesn’t allow you to do a search or view the new text. I kept screwing that up in the first half an hour.

Some questions I remember….I am purging my memory as I type….

- I had about 7 PCT Qs and a bunch of Appeal questions. Surprisingly not many questions on consisting versus comprising and multiple dependents and so forth.
- Potter (Thank you…moving on…saved four minutes)
- Lip Balm with fruit and vegetable flavors
- Moon dust Question (Thank you…moving on…saved 2 minutes or so)
- I do remember some Piecemeal question being asked…doubt I got it right…had no clue.
- Trade Secret question?
- A question on too many dependent claims and what to do. Multiplicity. I looked up the answer and found it saying how the examiner should CALL you on the phone and ask you to basically make a selection. Would have gotten that one wrong if I had guessed rather than looking it up. You need to be able to search effectively!!!
- Japanese patent…failed to rescind the nonpublication request…answer 45 days. (Thank you…moving on…saved 2 minutes)
- Titanium Baseball Question…shown to the private people first….thanks guys! Got one right from this website…and that may have made all the difference!!!
- Parking Meter
- I did get a Broom Question where they try to patent the handle and the bristles or something….it is a blur already….
- I did get the Tables question where there are 52 tables and you need to look up the answer and see that you need 2 CDs and that only if any individual table is over 50 pages or if you have more than 100 tables can they be put on CDs.
- Pierre Question
- Hydrocyclone Question….I surely got his wrong. Oops. This is funny, I remember knowing that I had it before, but I just couldn’t figure it out quick enough and guessed wrong and moved on and failed to come back to it. Questions like this you should just memorize and not waste you time with it. See, you don’t need perfection…just 70%!!!
- Toy Plane with Al wings
- I got a question, which was tough, about whether the PTO will investigate fraud allegations when coming from a reexam, a reissue, or a protest. What sucks about this question is that you had to jump around to different sections and do searches to find whether the PTO would even look at a fraud allegation. The answer I think was in a reissue, where the PTO won’t normally look at, unless it comes from a decision from a prior court ruling concerning the same patent, and sure enough the facts had this exact scenario laid out.
- Adhesive Layer Question…got it wrong when I originally took it, got it right on the test! Thank you…moving on…saved 2 minutes.
- Melting Question where the invention melts at a lower temp and the best answer is the one with the affidavit. Just spotted it, remembered it and found the answer. Thank you…moving on.
- I remember several questions on obviousness. You need to know how to get around it and what the examiner can and can’t do.

Another tip, I also folded my scratch paper and then flattened it back out to make a huge chart so I could mark all the questions and answers. Taking a test on computer sucks because you can’t just scribble out the bad answers, and then you forget which ones you already canceled out. I actually did this during the review of the computer usage in the morning, so I didn’t waste any test time. Then, come back a bit early to the exam and do it while you are still on break. It totally rocked and saved me a bunch of times. It is just plain smart.

So to sum up, do OLD QUESTIONS, memorize the unique ones because you will surely see them repeated and save you time. Also, you MUST be able to look things up fast and efficiently. And don’t panic…I almost did as it was a tough test. Not to brag, but I am about as smart as they come and I thought the test was EXTREMELY difficult. I tell you this to be honest and not to scare you. I even have filed and got patents granted on my own inventions, so I have actually done this stuff in real life and still thought the test was hard. In fact, I thought I failed, I had to read the screen three times to make sure it said I passed! Yippee!!!

By the way, if you fail, no worries, take it again. This test has absolutely NO BEARING on whether you will be a good patent attorney/agent or not. It is like hazing, you have to pass their ridiculous test to be part of the club. Unfortunately you have to play by their rules. Good luck to the rest of you.

Reply

371 EmilyNo Gravatar October 21, 2009 at 10:43 am

I’m a little confused by something. Continuing applications and regular applications where a provisional has previously been filed must include a cross-reference to the parent, and you must also make a claim for priority within 4/16 months? Does the reference to the parent not establish priority? If not, what is its purpose? Thank you!!

Reply

372 dcNo Gravatar October 22, 2009 at 3:43 am

passed today! 10/21/09 first time. i’ll share the questions i got, at least the ones i remember.

mirror – chose answer E, parallel/perpendicular. dealt with 112.
PCT – sweden and costa rica both showed up. same fact pattern, same answer. forward it to IB and filing date is date filed in US.
japan – 45 days is answer.
piecemeal – answer is all of them.
broom – telephone call is answer.
spanish phone – answer was “c”, 102D will kill the CIP.
advisory action – answer is 2 months from date of AA.
PTO-892
difficult best mode question.
several death of inventor questions.
a lot of assignment questions for some reason.
a lot of appeals.

i basically memorized 2002-2003. i only reviewed the 2000-2001 questions that were on the “Repeated questions’ section on this website.

this website helped me get 5-8 freebies. 2002-2003 probably got me 20 more.

Reply

373 Jen PingNo Gravatar October 26, 2009 at 10:37 pm

I am about to take the exam and want to know more about search methods in Acrobat Adobe. Any suggestion and tips are greatly appreciated. Thanks,

Jen

Reply

374 MarkNo Gravatar October 27, 2009 at 12:14 am

Took it today (10/26), passed… thank goodness, don’t think I could go through that again. I found the computer to be incredibly painful in comparison to what I was using in practice tests. The screens seem to be good, seems to be a software issue, both the test and pdf screens were horribly blurry. And I found the search to be very painful. In general, I was counting on fast lookups, and they took a lot longer than when I had been practicing… but I guess it was good enough.

The list of questions from recent exams were good, thanks everyone – took some notes, when I collect my thoughts will post the ones I remember as well. I did the list of ~60 “newer” questions on the site, Oct 2003, Apr 2003, and Oct 2002 (all once). Saw quite a few repeats – but in some cases couldn’t remember it right off, so had to go through lookup anyway…

Mark

Reply

375 IrisNo Gravatar October 27, 2009 at 10:55 pm

Passed. I really appreciate this website and all the guys who shared their experience.

I used PLI and this website and the websites that this website links, and read some chapters of MPEP (600, 700, 2100, 1200, 1400, 1800, and 2200) as well. Knowing the tests 2003-2002 cold is very helpful. “Exam questions and concepts” on this web gives me some freebies.

Regarding the test, in the morning section I had 40 mins left. In the afternoon, 1 hour left. Some questions are not verbatim, but easy to find in MPEP. Some repeats from the old tests.

Here are the questions I can remember.

- 102 rejection may be: more than one references … 5 choices, which one is right
- Protest submitted after publication date
- Hair gel and shoe polish, same compound, different use
- 5.5-7.5% Ni, 7-11%Mo, disclosure 9% is the perfect, prior art 6% Ni, 8%Mo, how to overcome
- PCT German last day ->fax
- PCT prior to Nov 29, 200, what is the prior date for 102(e) publication.
- Lamp-clock, dimension/size
- Reissue: after certificate of correction, reissue should not underline what CC did.
- Appeal new argument/court decision
- nonobviousness double patenting, assigned, who can sign terminal disclaimer
- Two applications, same subject matter, not commonly owned, not same inventors….. less than one year… options are obvious double patenting/statutory double patenting/double patenting/102e rejection/none -> 102(e) rejection
- Appeal: board affirms claims1-7, reverse claims 8-10 -> the examiner rewrite 8-10 or set one month to have the applicants rewrite.
- Combination/subcombination question -> 806.05(c) verbatim.
- 119 (e) and 120, where to claim the propriety -> the first sentence of the spec or ADS
- Laminate adhesive layer variation, overcome 102(b) rejection: comprising or consisting
- wireless phone 102(b) rejection -> experimental use
- A applied provisional app 1 (date1), ABC applied provisional app 2 (date 2), A applied nonprovisional app1 (date 3) claimed priority of provisional of 1 and 2, ABC, applied n not remeberon provisional app2 (date 4) claimed priority of provisional 1 and 2, but date 4 is over one year from those of provisional 1 and 2, a prior art is on the date before date 1 (or between date 1 and date 2, not remember clearly). Question seems to ask what is proper?
- one tough question: After final rejection (no date), filed the Notice of Appeal on 10/21/2001, on 4/18/2002, file continuous app and also tell if there is extension time needed, the Commissioner can charge the fee in the deposit account, today is 5/1/2002, the question asked what is proper/improper by today. The answer options are
A. … proper…
B. not proper … (mentioned 5 months).
C. The Director extends the time, the Commissioner does not extend the time.
D. not proper …
E. proper…. (Mentioned separate paper needed for the different matters …and there is 6 months….)
- some 103 obviousness Qs, some 102 Qs, some Advisory Action vs SSP Qs, best mode Q

Reply

376 AlexNo Gravatar November 4, 2009 at 12:26 pm

I also passed on my first try yesterday. This website was a tremendous help. Even though, I took PLI course, that probably would not be enough. While it is true, that appeals and PCT chapters are still being tested heavily, I was prepared for that. I want to thank everybody who posted messages in the past. That was very helpful. For all of you, who are taking the exam in the near future, I would recommend to practice old exams as much as you can + “newer” questions on this website. Also, you need to know important concepts such as anticipation, best mode, Graham factors, etc. I only remember few questions that came up:
mirror – chose answer E, parallel/perpendicular. dealt with 112.
japan – 45 days is answer.
spanish phone – answer was “c”, 102D will kill the CIP.
difficult best mode question.
Death of Inventor after he’s assigned part of invention to his atty
a lot of appeals.
102 rejection may be: more than one references …
combination/sub-combination
102(e) prior art questions that dealt with international applications
Claim counting – Ans 147 10.03.#50AM.
Step for crossing- 10.03.#23.AM.
Action after 2x rejection – 2Q 10.03.#42.AM.
Appeal- 10.03.#38AM and read MPEP 1214.06 Examiner sustained in whole or part and expect to be heavily tested on this concept.
102d- 10.03.#8.AM
Enablement- 10.03.#18AM
Anticipation- 10.03.#7PM variation
103 obviousness- variation but same concepts-10.03#16PM
Jon Jones Design variation- choice (c) not there-10.03.#18PM
Oath/ADS and address/citizenship-10.03.#22PM;#43PM
Certificate of mailing and foreign country concept-10.03.#34
XYZ assignee and divisional concept-10.03.#38PM
Prima Facie concepts drawn similar to 10.03.#33PM
And also read MPEP 2142 ‘…Basic Criteria’.

Good luck to all of you and if you will study hard, you’ll pass it too.

Reply

377 InventionistNo Gravatar November 5, 2009 at 8:32 pm

First thanks to all here. I passed this week. This site was a BIG help. My strategy: Read through 90% of the MPEP (though I didn’t read PCT & Paris Conv. Appendix). This was much more than necessary to pass. I went through the April 03 test un-timed (read, answer, then looked up answer), studied up on sections I needed, made a 102/103 table to help memorize, took the 2002 tests timed and then the April 03 test timed and then the Oct. 03 test timed (to give me a good indication of how I was doing), then the April 03 test again. Made my own test of all the answers I have ever missed plus the 2000-2001 questions that were reported repeats. In all about 5 weeks at about 60 hours/week (though I had a head start having filed about 14 non-provisionals pro se and having read through Patent it Yourself).
ALWAYS be sure to read the answers as to why the other selections are incorrect. This is great insight as to how they write the “tricky” parts into the questions and helps you remember the correct answers. Along the way, make 1 sentence notes each question you miss after the first test. This is a quick reference study sheet that is much quicker than going through the entire questions again.
Second, I wanted to try and help future test takers by proposing that there be a file/section on this website identifying the questions that are no longer good questions/valid with regards to using E8R4. When I was taking the practice exams, I got hung up on quite a few questions because they didn’t correspond to E8R4, which threw off my time. It would have been better to practice having omitted those questions. Some of the questions have been noted in the answers (“All answers were accepted”) but it is better to know that ahead of time. Below are some of the questions I have flagged and comments (I expect there are more out there):
Test Q# Issue
10/15/03AM 2 All answers were accepted
10/15/03AM 30 Answers B or D were accepted
4/15/03AM 25 See MPEP 1211.03 1st paragraph “Affidavits or declarations filed after a final rejection and prior to a notice of appeal are handled as provided in MPEP § 715.09, § 716, and § 716.01. >If such evidence has not been treated by the examiner, the Board may remand the proceeding to permit the examiner to consider such evidence.” Thus D is also incorrect.
4/15/03AM 28 Bad question as noted in the answers
4/15/03AM 31 I personally think this is a bad question because as I read it, non-English language documents do still require “Verification of the document”,( 37 CFR 1.495(f)) which would probably be in a statement by a translator. I think it is unfortunate that they USPTO still uses this question (I had it on my test), but knew to put down “none of the above.” I understand that there used to be an official “verification statement” required for some things, but this isn’t necessarily obvious to new test takers.
4/15/03AM 45 37 CFR 1.193(a)(2) does not exist in E8R4. From 37 CFR 41.39(a)(2) and (b). , it seems quite permissible to enter a new ground of rejection and what the course of action is for the applicant. (I’m not sure what was in 37 CFR 1.193(a)(2).
4/15/03PM 43 Bad question as noted in the answers
4/17/2002AM 12 According to E8R4, a patent from a national stage application from an IA (filed prior to 11/29/2000) is accorded a 102(e) date as of the date it fulfills 371(c ) (1)(2)& (4) as in MPEP 706.02(f) (Example 6, and Section III flowchart). Thus, the correct answer should be (C ).
4/17/2002AM 34 The answer is supposed to be (E), however in E8R4, the proposed drawing correction practice has ended and the drawings no longer need to show changes marked in red as described in MPEP 714 II (D.) (last paragraph on page 700-219): “No proposed changes in red ink should be submitted. Any proposed drawing corrections will be treated as non-compliant under 37 CFR 1.121(d).
4/17/2002AM 39 The filing of CPA’s for utility applications is not proper in E8R4, thus this question is improper.
I hope this helps,
Inventionist

Reply

378 NewrhythmsNo Gravatar November 5, 2009 at 9:50 pm

Hi folks! Congrats to those who passed their Patent bar exam. I see quite a few people have posted about their successful passing of the exam in the last few days. I am wondering if any one is planning to sell their PLI study materials? I have only recently finished grad school and cannot afford the royal sum of money for the course! Please keep me in mind if you are! Thanks! newrhythms90@gmail.com

Reply

379 AshNo Gravatar November 5, 2009 at 11:17 pm

Hi Newrhythms

I passed the exam today, just a few hours ago. Had a great experience, thoroughly enjoyed taking the exam. I am looking to sell my PLI material (unmarked) and notes that I made (from patentbar.com’s 60 questions) for $650. Contact me if you are interested. ashwinya@gmail.com

Will post the questions that I encountered tomorrow.

Ash

Reply

380 Jen PingNo Gravatar November 7, 2009 at 4:54 pm

Hi All,

I see in a lot os answers to old exams it refers to documents with numbers such as 65 FR 50092. What are these documents? Do we need to study them for the exam?

Thx,

Reply

381 AShNo Gravatar November 7, 2009 at 10:39 pm

I passed the exam on the 5th in Albany,NY. The AM session had a lot of new questions, surprisingly mostly from chapters 300 and 600. The PM session was a breeze. Overall there were many repeats from 2003 and also a bunch from this website. A big thank you to everyone who contributed. I figured I should extend the same courtesy to future test takers, so made an extensive list of qs that I got. If you need to discuss any of the new Qs, please ask.

Known ones

1. Mirror – Parallel/ perpendicular
2. Tribell
3. Moondust
4. Piecemeal
5. Velcro
6. J.J.Smithy
7. Jon Jones with answer corrected filing receipt removed, replaced with
ADS
8. Titanium baseball
9. Tommie and Jo (diff version tho’)
10. Actual reduction to practice success
11. Design patent 6 month priority – Ans : Aug 6 2003
12. Appeals – 1-5 rejected, claims 6-10 allowed
13. Appeals – Application abandoned bcos board rejected indep claim 1
14. PCT – 102(e) date for patent filed pre – 11/29/00 I chose N.S date
15. PCT – 102(e) date for IA with prov and non-prov priority -Ans :non-prov priority
16. PCT – Fax question
17. PCT – German filing , published in German, not in English, I chose No 102(e) date
18. PCT – 2 Qs Costa Rica , Sweden similar fact patterns
20. Buzzcuts/Hairgel
21. X-Y-Z composition for growing hair
22. PCT – ISR one month invitation to comment on abstract
23. Best mode – chose the one which said there is no need for the inventor to point out the embodiment he considers best, if he has mentioned a best mode
24. Small Entity status signature – w/o establishing ownership
25. Who can sign TD? when there are 2 inventors, 2 assignees with 40% each of share ..The answers were framed in such a way that there was only one right pick -the applicants. The other choices included one applicant, one owner, etc, which didn’t seem right.
26. Attorney of part interest can take over deceased inventor’s application prosecution
27.Door handle
28. Crossing a road
29. 147 claim counting
30. Benefit claim deletion – translation not necessary
31. Issue fee transmittal form
32. Combination/Subcombination
33. Protest after pubn – sole Japanese patent/articke
34. 102(b) anticipation – nonanalogous, disparages, teaches away. Ans : None
35. All can be prior art under 102(a) except : invention by the same inventor
36. Barry Foreman obviousness

New ones

1. Appeals – Board’s new ground of rejection – 3 Qs
4. A question about FIU
5. A Q about NIRC (Chap 700)
6. Interview -All except, Examiner cannot call before attorney does, for invasion of privacy. I chose this as it seemed odd.
7. CPA cannot be given Cert.of mailing
8. Prov. appln cannot have a continuation
9. Which is true? Drawings/formal/informal/ B& W – I chose B& W cannot be considered as formal drawings
10. 1.105 Duty to disclose
11. Exparte Reexam cannot be based on anything other than prior patents and publications.
12. Reissue appln needs Spec, claims, drawings for filing date
13. RCE and IDS submission w/o any other attachments can be submitted when?
Choices were
1. Before non-final action
2. Before notice of allowance
3. Before issue fee is paid
4. Don’t remember
5. None
I chose None. I doubt if that is right
14. CIP -first sentence should include priority claim to parent
15. 102(f) – Doesn’t need subsequent effective date – this was a very interesting Q.
16. Examiner’s prior knowledge in the art
17. Examiner’s stt in Reasons for allowance not needed when : Applicant compiles with 1.133(b) & something else – Another interesting Q.
18. Missing mailing addr in declaration for inventor B. Everyone can sign supplemental Except ? I chose the one with all inventors A,B,C ..looked up MPEP 600.
19. There were many Qs about claims and Spec from 2100
20. Sally is a patent owner. Against another patent she may file anything except :
Choices were
1. Reissue
2. Reexam
3. Protest
4. Prior art citation
I chose Protest bcos that can only be against a pending application, not an issued patent..Dunno if this is right
21. Amendments needed after notice of allowance. How should applicant file to extend patent term?
I chose file amendment before issue fee is paid .Didn’t chose the option with RCE as RCE would result in patent reduction (PTA). Again, not sure.
22. Which is false? Ans: Exparte reexam need not identify real party in interest

thanks again folks !

Reply

382 DPNo Gravatar November 9, 2009 at 8:00 pm

hey,

If anyone has the outline from Longacre Patent Bar Review course, we can chat at devenp@gmail.com.

Thanks
DP

Reply

383 HobertNo Gravatar November 10, 2009 at 5:31 pm

I passed the exam yesterday. Initially I planned to read sections 700, 1200, 1400, 2100 and App R once or twice each. However after skimming App R and sections 700 and 2100, I realized it would be pointless for me. So I just took a week and a half or so and worked through the old tests from 2000 through 2003. In doing so I looked up every answer and reviewed the explanations if I had any doubt as to the correctness or incorrectness of any of the answer choices. By the time I finished working through the October 2003 test, I could find almost anything I needed relatively quickly. The only other thing I did in addition to working through the old tests was to memorize all of the elements of the 102 provisions.

I encountered a number of old questions including Tribell, Smithy, “means for opening a door”, Jon Jones with the new answer choice, mirror parallel/perpendicular, appeal claims 1-5 rejected/ 6-10 allowed, and a bunch of PCT filing questions (costa rica, Japanese app, Swedish inventors). I wish I could remember more, but I can’t off the top of my head.

I first started my test prep by reading this site, so I thought I would post the little bit of info I had.

My test center experience was great. The monitor was a decent sized LCD. Moving from question to question was quick. Moving from section to section and searching the MPEP was better than on my personal computer.

Reply

384 RyanNo Gravatar November 10, 2009 at 7:03 pm

Passed the exam today. The facility itself was excellent; very quiet and the equipment was top notch. 19″ LCD’s with Core 2 Duo PC’s, and the testing application itself was very speedy. One thing that threw me was that you couldn’t use key commands (Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V) for copying and pasting words from the questions, which I was used to doing this for looking up things in the MPEP. Also, it seems that searching through the MPEP. It also wouldn’t let you specify where you wanted to start your search from. If you opened up a new chapter of the MPEP it would always start from the beginning, and it would always start you off where you finished off your last search in the chapter if you kept that chapter open. This was a bit painful for me since I was used to scrolling to a section and searching that section specifically (example, I would open chapter 1200 appeals and want to search 1206 for when you could file an amendment after the appeal brief had been filed, but it would make me start searching from the beginning of the section).

My particular test focused A LOT on appeal. I figured there would be a lot on PCT seeing as the market place is going global more and more, but not so much. I had maybe 5 or so repeats, all from 2002/2003 exams.

I don’t want to take the wind out of this website at all, but I can absolutely attribute 90% of my passing to freepatentbar.com’s exam simulator. The real exam was exactly like this (except for the key command shortcuts), which made nothing on the real thing a surprise. It was perfect for being able to track my times and results every time I retook the exams. This website was excellent for tracking the new questions on current exams and for summarizing the MPEP concepts (ESPECIALLY the PCT bits). I highly recommend registering for the exam simulator on the freepatentbar.com website and taking the 2002/2003 exams over and over (I took each section 3 times) until your score 90%+ on each of them. This will get you used to searching the MPEP and you’ll have the repeat questions memorized which will save you some time on the real thing.

I started my preparation for the exam back in February this year. I went into this dead cold in patent law. I’m currently a Project Engineer and, at the time, had zero knowledge into patents. My advice, if you’re starting out cold, is to get the book “Introduction to Patent Law” by Mueller. The summarization study guides on this website and freepatentbar.com and be quite intimidating and overly dry if you’re just starting out. This book is excellent for bringing you up to speed with the core concepts and acronyms used in the USPTO. After that, go after the study guides and exam simulator.

I wish you luck!

Reply

385 Emily M.No Gravatar November 11, 2009 at 9:38 pm

What is the best way to study old exam questions? I’m getting close to the end of my PLI course and am getting ready to tackle the old exams. I know this is a big part of a successful study strategy, but I’m not sure how to approach the questions because I’m worried that I’ll memorize questions and answers, and then the questions on the test will have a slight change in the fact pattern or answer choices that will throw me off. Do the test writers do this or have old questions really been word for word repeats? Thanks in advance for the help! I’m glad to see that there have been several success stories lately!

Reply

386 KeithNo Gravatar November 13, 2009 at 11:45 am

Could anyone tell me how to find 66 F. R. 1099?

Thanks.
Keith

Reply

387 Tech PasserNo Gravatar November 13, 2009 at 12:58 pm

You don’t need to know the F.R. Focus on the USC and CFR sections, which can both be found in the MPEP.

Reply

388 KeithNo Gravatar November 13, 2009 at 8:08 pm

Thanks,

Keith

389 ErikNo Gravatar November 14, 2009 at 2:00 pm

Hi,

I passed the patent bar my first time using this website and the PLI Patent Bar review materials. If you are interested in buying the PLI materials (books, cds and DVDs) I am selling mine for $600. You can get them through Amazon here:

Or just email me directly: erikcsmith @ gmail . com

Good luck on your studies!!!

Erik

Reply

390 JackNo Gravatar November 17, 2009 at 12:52 am

===THE BEST WAY TO PASS===

(1) Review all exams between 2003 and 2000 until you can answer each question by memory (as much as possible w/o reading the question). Most of these will show up as repeats.

(2) Review all new questions posted on this website. Put the questions/answers/MPEP sections into an Excel spreadsheet. Break them down until you can recognize the question by memory (just like the old exams above).

(3) By doing steps (1) and (2) (and reviewing the answers/studying relevant MPEP sections), you will become familiar with the MPEP.

(4) Do this until you can’t stand it anymore – you will pass.

Reply

391 ydhNo Gravatar May 31, 2010 at 2:52 pm

Passed! I took your advice and others’ in this site. Thank you.

Reply

392 First TryNo Gravatar November 18, 2009 at 4:50 pm

I just passed today. The morning section was shockingly difficult in that there were very few repeat questions (maybe 3 or 4) and many questions on obscure topics (drawings, third party submissions, nonobviousness). I had to do alot of searching and practically ran out of time.

The third party submissions was really confusing, but I picked the answer with no fee.

The drawings question looked familiar (similar one on an old exam but this was a variant). Choices such as “informal drawings.” Don’t remember what I picked.

The afternoon was much better, many repeats (around 10). Certainly a number of PCT and appeal but not as much as I had imagined from reading this site. One thing that was helpful was reading how applications not in english submitted to the USPTO will be forwarded to the IB. I did lots of searching in Ch 2100.

A question I’m not sure about – first filing in australia, sought stage II at the IB, then within 30 months sent in spec/fee to the USPTO. i choose the answer as abandoned, since a copy of the application must be filed. however, it’s possible that stage II qualified the IB to forward your app to the USPTO… really didn’t have the time to find out.

Repeat q’s I saw:
- 45 days in japan
- tribell
- a number of small entity status
- returned maintenance fee
- means plus function door handle
- piecemeal (saw this on here, picked the recommended answer E!)
- 103/102 rejections
- a number of restrictions

I took the PLI home course, studied half heartedly for 1.5 months and pretty hard for 2 weeks. Did all the 2002/03 exams and looked over this useful site. Good luck to all!

Reply

393 Itoo PassedNo Gravatar November 25, 2009 at 9:49 am

I passed a couple of days ago in my second attempt. In my first attempt I got 68, I mainly focused on PLI materials and just spent few hours on this website.This time around I really went through this site specially focusing on recently reported questions and and exam concepts. That made the dofference! Thanks to the OWNER of this site and EVERYONE who contributed.

Questions that I remember:
Mirror (paralle/perpendicular)
Velcrow
Piecemeal
Electric toothbrush
Jon Jones (ADS to correct typo)
Door handle
Titanium baseball (publication)
2 Inventors assigned 80% each to a company; Who can sign reissue oath?
Trade secret on reexam
You have only numerical identifiers of a pending patent, Can you get the status?
Nonprovision patent application filed without claims; How can you keep the filing date?
The board affirms all of examiners rejections and issed some new grounds of rejections. Agent brings up arguments to succsessfully address all the rejections. What happens next?

If I remember anything else, I’ll post later.
Good luck to everyone.

Reply

394 Min009No Gravatar November 26, 2009 at 6:01 pm

Hello

Does anyone know where I can find a list of the countries which require publication at 18 months?

This is in relation to the Japan 45 days question.

Thanks.

Reply

395 Min009No Gravatar November 28, 2009 at 1:03 pm

Hello

Does anyone know where I can find a list of the countries which require publication at 18 months?

This is in relation to the Japan 45 days question.

Thanks in advance.

Reply

396 BobNo Gravatar December 1, 2009 at 1:42 pm

I have been looking at this website routinely for a couple of months and am thinking about finally taking the exam. I would really appreciate a couple of questions answered before I dive in:

1) Do I qualify to take the exam and am I marketable? I have a BS in biology and am finishing my phd in Biochemistry, I have no law school experience.

2) Is PLI the best study material other than this website and old exams?

Reply

397 Tech PasserNo Gravatar December 1, 2009 at 2:59 pm

A bachelor’s in biology should qualify you under option A, so you should have no problems getting accepted to sit for the test.

As for the study material, that’s really a matter of personal choice. I didn’t purchase any study materials, and I passed on my first attempt by just studying the MPEP, the materials on this website, and taking the practice tests over and over again.

Reply

398 Itoo Will PassNo Gravatar December 1, 2009 at 2:44 pm

Can anyone clarify about the passing grade for this exam, is it 63 (70% of the 90) or 70 (70% of the 100)? When I receive my grade on the computer after the exam, will it have accounted the 10 non-graded Qs?

If so then why isn’t 68 a passing score? scroll above to Itoo Passed’s Nov. 25th posting: “I passed a couple of days ago in my second attempt. In my first attempt I got 68, I mainly focused on PLI materials and just spent few hours on this website.”

Thanks,
Itoo will Pass…

Reply

399 Tech PasserNo Gravatar December 1, 2009 at 3:02 pm

The passing grade is 63 out of the 90 graded questions. The other ten do not count. Therefore, you could get a 68 total score, but if more than six of those you got right were beta questions, you do not get 63 of the 90 correct, and you do not pass. The best bet is to think a 73 is passing. If you answer 73 questions correctly, then you necessarily answered 63 of the graded questions right and passed.

When I took the exam, I was never told how many I got right or wrong. After the exam, I got a message that I had preliminarily passed the exam, and a month later, when I got my official results, all I was told was that I had passed. Maybe you only find out your score if you fail it?

Reply

400 IPFLANo Gravatar December 2, 2009 at 5:19 pm

Yup, you need 70% out of the 90 questions, i.e. 63 correct out of the 90 graded. This is made clear in the OED information.

401 VinNo Gravatar December 1, 2009 at 6:32 pm

Thanks to everyone who posted on this website, I wouldn’t have passed (mid-November) without it. Got a number of repeats (maybe 15 or so) that were verbatim, coming from the 00-03 exams or the questions section. Most of the other questions were really hard – a lot on appeal and PCT.

Just a few suggestions. Don’t waste too much time with review material – it was helpful to get an overview of the concepts but won’t really prepare you for this test. Don’t wait too long to start doing the old exams and questions. I got started on them just a month in advance (with a full-time job at the same time) and wish I’d done so sooner. Do get comfortable with searching the MPEP because you’ll need to be familiar with the chapter contents and being savvy with keyword searches will help. And of course, most importantly, read through people’s posts on this website b/c they know what they’re talking about.

Best of luck!

Reply

402 IPFLANo Gravatar December 2, 2009 at 5:13 pm

Took the test today and passed. Its really not a hard test, you just need to do plenty of practice questions ahead of time to get the major concepts down (102, 103, 112, Appeals) and learn how to search the MPEP. The bottom line is that every answer is right there in the MPEP, so its just a timing thing.

Compared to the bar exam, particularly the multi-state portion, the patent exam is a breeze. I still don’t understand how the pass rate is below 60% on this bad boy. That said, it does help immensley to have experience in patent prosecution (I worked under my boss doing pretty much everything (drafting, responding, appealing) for a year before studying for the test.

Reply

403 DaVinciCodeNo Gravatar December 6, 2009 at 8:43 pm

How many times can you take the exam within the 90-days window? When I asked USPTO, they said one time only. Is that true? I like to be able to take it more than once, in case I don’t pass the first time. I know I have to pay Prometric for it. But does USPTO restrict the test to only one time within 90-days? Thanks

Reply

404 upnorthguyNo Gravatar December 9, 2009 at 12:25 pm

When you register for the exam, you get a 90 day “window” to take the exam. You schedule the exam through Prometric. You can choose to take it on day 1 of the 90 day window (unlikely, since the availability of test dates at Prometric is usually 2-3 weeks out). If you pass the exam, you are done. If you fail the exam, you have to wait 30 days before you can reapply with the PTO (and pay the registration fee again).

Reply

405 Lucifer JohnsonvilleNo Gravatar December 9, 2009 at 1:00 pm

yes— scheduling the exam is nearly impossible. Do it ASAP.

Reply

406 DPNo Gravatar December 16, 2009 at 10:15 pm

I called them today and they said the same thing that I can only take it once during that 90 day window, if however, should i choose to take it again, i have to reapply. i am confused, i thought i can take it after 30 days without reapplying but by simply re-registering with prometric.

Left a msg with the OED legal assistant, hopefully they’ll get back to me.

DP

Reply

407 ABNo Gravatar December 17, 2009 at 5:04 pm

Please post on here when you find out. I have to reapply soon unfortunately.

Reply

408 newyork1No Gravatar December 18, 2009 at 6:06 pm

Hi,

I passed today on my second attempt. The first time I got a 68, which was literally a month ago. I didn’t want to let too much time go by before I took it again. They were very fast with my second registration and I was allowed to take it right away (after the 30 day window) If you do fail and get a similar score the first time around, I highly suggest taking it again as soon as you can. The questions were VERY similar to the first time I took it. The first time I spent bascially all my time on old exams and looking at this site. This time around I just spent more time becoming familiar with the major concepts -definitely get an overview of the appeals chapter it saves time for looking up questions – i’m not sure to what extent this helped except that I felt so much more confident on the test. It didn’t feel like i had simply memorized a bunch of questions. I also took the PLI course back in May, but I don’t think that contributed much except to gain exposure to an unfamiliar field.

I’m going to post the repeats and questions from this site that I encountered, but I think it’s really important that you take the reported questions with a grain of salt – basically just know where in hte MPEP you have to look if you see the question, don’t necessarily rely on other people’s answers

I didn’t see that much on appeals or PCT (although the ones I saw were confusing and repetitive), I saw a lot on re-examination surprisingly

I saw a lot more repeats this time for sure, mostly in the morning session:

Repeats:
Bond 60%C and 60%D
april 00 am 47
apr 00am 42-102(a)
apr 00 pm- 102(f)
Tommie and Jo variant
hair gel question- ex parte re-examination; it was the football pad one on a previous exam
japan/nonpublication request
mixture y
lancer
147 claim counting
DRAM
102(d)
Tribell
moondust
parking meter
door handle

there were a lot more, but those are the ones that come to mind – its a huge help knowing those questions because you are sure of the answers

of hte new questions i saw

trade secret
I saw 2 questions regarding Germany and PCT to determine 102(e) dates – one was pre-AIPA the other was after
costa rica
sweden
velcro question- the answer is the last one – reject based on being indefinite
how to petition a maintenance fee? i had no clue
my terminal disclaimer question was different – the answers were like “only the inventors have to sign” or “co. A. and co.B must sign togther” – i really wasn’t sure i put only the inventors but it definitely could be wrong
piecemeal
amending the abstract

I can’t even think more right now.

Reply

409 ChristineNo Gravatar December 21, 2009 at 12:25 pm

The Omniprep web site, as of 12/21/2009, recites “PROVEN 98% pass rate.” Not only is this not true, but this is deceptive, misleading, false advertising, and probably fraudulent and criminal.

As pointed out above, Omniprep offers a refund if you take their course but do not pass. They claim that only 2% of students have requested a refund because they did not pass, and therefore conclude that everyone who did not claim a refund had passed the test. What kind of flimsy evidence is that to base such a claim? And then they have the gall to call this a “PROVEN 98% pass rate”!! Do they think that we’re a bunch of idiots?

The truth is that the Omniprep pass rate is less than 98%. I know people who took Omniprep, failed the test, and did not claim a refund. Therefore, when they are factored into those who claimed the refund, the Omniprep pass rate is less than their “proven 98%.”

There are many reasons why those who do not pass the exam also do not attempt to claim the refund. For example, maybe they did not what to go through the hassle of getting the refund. Or maybe after enrolling in Omniprep the student decided not to take the test (and therefore did not pass). Or maybe after failing the test they simply forgot that Omniprep offers a refund, and therfore did not try to claim one. Or maybe they felt that even though they did not pass, Omniprep did provide some materials and instruction and that it would be unfair to get them for nothing and thus did not claim the refund. Or maybe they were too embarrassed to admit that they failed and did not file the claim. Or maybe they want to focus on the future and find ways to pass, rather than spend time to collect the refund and reinforce the idea that they failed. Or maybe they lost the receipt or proof of payment and thought it would be too much of a headache to try to collect it. There are many other reasons why someone who did not pass also did not try to collect a refund.

I can’t count the number of times that I have bought something and later found it to be defective, but I did not try to get a refund even though I was eligible to do so. It is one thing for a consumer to elect not claim a refund even though he or she may be entitled to do so. But it is wrong for the supplier (Omniprep) to assume that the product is satisfactory (passed the test) because a refund was not claimed and then to mislead and deceive the public by calling it “PROVEN 98% pass rate.”

In any event, I was considering enrolling in Omniprep. But no way after seeing this deception and false advertising.

Down with Omniprep.

Reply

410 jtNo Gravatar December 22, 2009 at 6:07 pm

Well I would agree that whomever runs the show at Omniprep is arrogant with this 98% proven pass rate, which I don’t believe. But so what, if they improve your chances of passing and they are relatively inexpensive, then it’s worth it.

Reply

411 Book of SwordsNo Gravatar December 22, 2009 at 7:53 pm

I passed… beforehand I was worried that I would have to take another 6 hour test if I failed this. freepatentbar.com, mypatentbar.com, and patentbarquestions.com helped a lot. With everyone contributing information, I think that is what helped me pass, so I figured I could say what I remember…

Two items for you: New Questions I can remember and Repeat questions I can remember

New Questions

1. A question related to 3 inventors A, B, and C on a pending application. Applicant discovers the ADDRESS is incorrect for Inventor B. How do you make an address change on the application? (one inventor may be unavailable, and these answers are just surmises)

A) Assignee of entire interest sends in an Application Data Sheet correcting
B) 3 inventors declare oath with correct addresses
C) Send in notification of Inventor B’s address
D) Assignee declares oath with all the correct Inventive Entity info
E) Assignee signs a petition under some number naming all inventors A, B, C declaring all inventors and identifies Inventive Entity

2. What amendments after final can be entered during appeal?

A) Amendment after 3 months
B) Amendment after 4 months.
C) ?
D) Some item that is oddly worded about it being sent to the board and the examiner confirms the reply brief, that is very similar to wording in MPEP ( I thought I saw it in 1200, but I can’t find)
E) None of the answers.

I answered E…

3. Some poorly-worded question asking which is true regarding reissue

A) (one of the answers related to Dependent claim [ENLARGED]) A reissued dependent claim omits a Original Claim Patent Limitation and an Independent Claim is …

I answered E) none are true

4. Many many variants of International Filing Date and non-US-nationals applying. Like 6 questions! Costa Rican’s ,Swedish, Mexican. One was an application claim to a foreign priority that claimed a provisional US application. What was the filing date? I answered The filing date was the Provisional given the time constraints and because it was filed in the US. Another question asked for a 102(e) date of an application that predated November 27th 2000 (1999?). I answered None.

REMEMBER: A PCT application filed that s not written in English or does not having any US residents as inventors that is designating US as Receiving Office, is accorded the filing date the US receives it, and forwards it to the International Bureau Receiving Office, since the US office is not a competent office.

5. Inequitable Conduct: Typically examiner does not look into inequitable conduct based on admission by applicant, but in which case may it be taken into account

A) Applicant says “not intentional” even though Examiner knows there is inequitable conduct
B) Applicant says “unintentional” about knowing some art or court case
C) ?
D) Third Party files a protest of fraud saying he invented the invention first
E) a variant of D

6. (I can’t quite remember this one right, but D was the answer to how the question was written) Which one does not work to invoke 112 6th paragraph?

(A) the claim limitations uses the phrase “means for” or “step for;”
(B) the “means for” or “step for” must be modified by functional language; and
(C) the phrase “means for” or “step for” must not be modified by sufficient structure, material or acts for achieving the specified function.
D) the claim limitation recites “step for”
E) None of them invoke 112 6th paragraph
My answer was D) due to that funny E ending, and since

7. All are required for an oral hearing except:

a) Separate paper
b) Filing Fee
c) Written Request
d) Time and Date of Oral Hearing
e) All are required

The correct answer is D, MPEP 1209, the board picks a date and time.

8. What constitutes a 102(b) public sale bar?

A)
B)
C) A commercial sell, but is rejected
D)
E) some crazy answer which is a specific court case in the MPEP where an order was placed and the answer was “bla la”

Correct answer was the sale that was rejected, which has some ambiguity but is says specifically in MPEP that may constitute a bar.

REPEAT QUESTIONS

3 Questions regarding new grounds of rejection on Appeal

Variant of Acme company with the given fact that the assignment has already been recorded, so what now.

Various Items I remember from previous questions that ended up being questions.

• Potter question was asked.
• Rescind and 45 days,
• assignee not of record may assign small entity,
• How long from time can you get a refund for small entity.
• You must reclaim foreign priority in a reissue, even if mentioned in the original
• Cancer question
• Regarding Multiplicity – Call up attorney
• What is required for Piecemeal – 4 items, one including Multiplicity
• Revival of Ex Parte Examination
• Incorrect spelling of inventor Jon convert to John, how do you fix?

GOOD LUCK

Reply

412 KHNo Gravatar December 24, 2009 at 12:30 pm

‘m taking the patent bar in a few months and I was wondering if I should really spend the money on a prep course, or if there’s a cheaper way to get by. I’ve seen a lot of cheap prep books on Amazon, but I really haven’t heard anything about them. Everyone I know who passed took BarBri or PLI. Any suggestions? Thanks!!!

Reply

413 Tech PasserNo Gravatar December 24, 2009 at 1:47 pm

I know a lot of people buy those materials, but I can tell you that I passed a few months ago, and I only spent $30. And I shouldn’t even have spent that. I mainly studied the study guide from freepatentbar.com, all the previous exams, and this website. I studied 8-10 hours a day for three weeks, and then I passed. If you would like more information on how I studied, just let me know. I’d be happy to help.

Reply

414 KHNo Gravatar December 25, 2009 at 3:54 am

Thank you so much for the feedback! I found it very helpful. I definitely have a better idea of what my study plan will be while trying to stick to a budget. I appreciate the offer to provide me with more information, which I may have to take you up on as my approach develops. Thanks!!!

415 ZenaNo Gravatar February 9, 2010 at 5:02 pm

Hi Tech Passer,

I have read your posts and am very interested in learning how you prepared yourself for the exam as I have no prior patent experience.

For example, I looked at the guide by freepatentbar.com and it is stated to read Appendix R – Patent Rules as the first step. I am still a bit confused. Perhaps, the material you purchased for $30 gives a decent introduction? Can you tell me what is the $30 prep material that you bought?

Thanks so much

416 Tech PasserNo Gravatar February 9, 2010 at 8:28 pm

Zena,

I used the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide as introductory material. You can get it for $29.99 on Amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/Patent-Bar-Exam-Ultimate-Delivery/dp/B002B36NSC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=miscellaneous&qid=1265761406&sr=8-1

I read through the guide and took notes from it before I started taking tests and looking at this website. It was a fairly good introduction for somebody who had not so much as seen a patent before starting the studying. However, I also looked through freepatentbar.com’s study guide, and after taking the test, I felt that would have been enough as an introduction rather than the Ultimate Guide, especially since it’s free.

However, if you do purchase this guide, you will get access to the PDF study guide and a website with all the published exams from 1998-2003, which is very helpful. I would not suggest depending on just the guide for studying because I can almost guarantee that you will not pass, but if you use the guide, the tests, and this website, you can pass just like I did.

Also, a small note on Appendix R: It’s just title 37 of the CFR. It’s good to know the information in there, and you will undoubtedly have to study from it when you read the answers to the old tests, but just reading the rules is not very helpful without context, which is what the MPEP provides.

Let me know if I can help in any other way, and good luck!

417 JimNo Gravatar June 9, 2010 at 4:05 pm

Anyone have the study guide from freepatentbar.com? It’s not on their website anymore, and I was counting on using it !!!!
You are authorized to share it based on the Creative Commons Share-Alike License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/)!
Someone please help! My email is patents.dude@gmail.com .

418 IPFLANo Gravatar December 24, 2009 at 2:48 pm

Just to throw this out there, I suggest folks who want to pass the test and have an actual working knowledge of patent law do the PRG course. Heck, even if you’ve already passed the test, I’d recommend it. Of course its expensive, but it will make you more knowledgeable and thus more profitable in the future.

That said, I used this site a ton in the weeks leading up to the exam, tons of great Q and A and it helps to see the pattern in the tests the PTO gives. Only thing is, don’t always trust the answers above because they like to change the call of the question and the answer choices a lot. Try to understand the reason why the answer is right, rather than straight memorization.

***I’m not affiliated with PRG whatsoever

Reply

419 KHNo Gravatar December 25, 2009 at 4:01 am

Thanks for the tips regarding the Q and As. It helps to know what to focus on with those.

I agree that actual working knowledge of patent law is important and I will have to look into PRG when my budget isn’t so tight.

Thank you! Your advice is much appreciated!!

Reply

420 GoJacketsNo Gravatar December 28, 2009 at 9:44 am

Took the exam on the 18th and passed. God bless this site is all I can say. I would not have passed without it.

Morning session was VERY easy. Between repeats, verbatim MPEP lookups and questions discussed on this site, there were maybe 5 questions I wasn’t entirely sure about.

Some repeats/repeated concepts
*2 month advisory action rule (know what happens when PTO replies after 3 months AND before 3 months – when are fees calc’d from
*Hairgel/football pads
*Chemical claim where there was an initial rejection based on enablement and written description; I said withdraw both rejections (check MPEP for the wording of how to satisfy your burden of showing enab + WD . . . its the exact same as the problem, so I said the guy met the burden)
*NO TITANIUM BASEBELL Q!! WTF, USPTO, I was looking forward to that one!
*Petition to make special, when you don’t need to pay fee
* 6 month 102(d) deadline on design patents
*Mexican nationals
*When 102&103 rejections inappropriate – when cumulative
*The fan-clock-light question – the dimensions don’t matter, it can anticipate even if the drawing doesn’t have dimensions (or somethinglike that)
*means for opening door
*method for crossing the street
*Investigating deceptive intent
*Piecemeal examination
*Assignee of entire interest can sign SE statement before establishing ownership
*Best mode – no need to indicate which is best, so long as best is disclosed
*Third party submissions and protests – what can and can’t be in there (underlining, explanations, etc.)
*No underlining or bracketing when you have a certificate of correction in a reissue (or reexam, whatever it is)
*Hydrocyclone (pick the one that says “method”)
*The two laminate layers one, be sure to read the question and look for “comprising” vs. “consisting of”

Afternoon session was REALLY hard. A bunch of questions I had never seen discussed ANYWHERE on this site or any other. I freaked out a little, so I’m sorry I don’t even remember the prompts, let alone the answer choices. I guess maybe they were the beta Q’s? There were, however, a TON of verbatim look-ups. Probably like 15 in the afternoon where I had no idea why the answer was right, but it was word-for-word from the MPEP so it had to be right, and the other choices were word-for-word with one key word changed so I knew they were wrong. Knowing where to look is CRUCIAL because the search function stinks on the Prometric computers.

As for how to prep, I did the Longacre course. Really the only helpful part of it was the immense bank of test questions. His video lectures were worthless. Do questions until your eyeballs bleed and that is the only way to learn your way around the MPEP. Obviously, do all of the old tests back to 2001, know why the right answers are right and the wrong ones are wrong. And read through the discussions about the reported questions.

Again, thanks to this site. Honestly, I don’t know how this site hasn’t singlehandedly brought up the pass rate on this test…and/or received a cease and desist letter from the UPSTO hahaha!

Reply

421 SRNo Gravatar January 5, 2010 at 8:17 am

I am planning on taking the test in a couple of months. I find this site to be extremely useful. Thank you for all the info, guys!

Reply

422 PGNo Gravatar January 7, 2010 at 3:36 am

passed. this site was extremely useful. about 20-25 repeats.

Reply

423 ChristinaNo Gravatar January 11, 2010 at 5:21 pm

Passed the January exam, PG?

Reply

424 PGNo Gravatar January 15, 2010 at 9:14 pm

yes, jan 2 computer exam. i pretty much had the 2002/2003 exams memorized, plus a few select q’s from earlier exams. used patbar and also http://www.patentbarstudyguide.com/

search many q’s too in the mpep.

425 laptasticNo Gravatar January 9, 2010 at 9:42 am

took it yesterday and passed.
Heavy on appeal and PCT
Usual repeats, Tribel, Japanese PCT, moondust, claim counting (8), 102(e) + PCT, overcoming 102(a), (b), (e), doorhandle, Markush, etc.
AM was far more difficult than PM generally, if only because I spent much more time looking things up in the morning.

Thanks to all who contributed to this site.

Reply

426 Please Donot SuemeNo Gravatar January 9, 2010 at 4:08 pm

Stay away from TAPRE patent bar reveiw! Their product takes way over 7 days to arrive and its basically made from a kinko’s copy machine low on ink. There are so many typos and misspellings that I gave up reading after the first day – you just can’t trust the accurracy of what you’re reading when their are that many mistakes. The summary is just a cut-and-paste job from the actual MPEP and their tests don’t even have the questions broken down by chapter or indicate which questions are most often seen on the exam.

I wasted a ton of time waiting for the course to arrive and now i’ve got to wait another week for the PLI homestudy course to arrive.

Bottom line – don’t waste your time TAPRE is a joke and a rip-off.

I’ll let you all know if/when I get my money back from them as they promise.

Reply

427 ChristinaNo Gravatar January 11, 2010 at 5:35 pm

Appeal questions were to the end of the appeal process.

PCT questions were to the beginning of the process, namely, when the US/RO is not competent to receive.

REMEMBER! and mark my words! always search part of an answer in the appropriate chapter as a searching technique, especially unique phrases in the answers. For example, typing in “personal acquaintence” took me to the sweet spot on one of the questions in the December exam.

TYPE IN PART OF THE ANSWER(S) once you open the right chapter. It’s a great search method. Type in the truncated term! such as “reject” for rejection/rejects/rejecting or “indefinit” for “indefinite/indefiniteness/etc. or “inventor” for inventorship/inventors/etc. Of course, this means you have to know the right chapter; but a very quick review of the table of contents of the chapter will allow you to guess where approximately in the chapter the answer may be; so you can skip to that general section and then start searching for the word. Don’t ever sit there and “read” a portion. If you can’t find it ASAP, you are not using the word search function appropriately. For example, one answer on the exam was on the on sale bar, and said “an offer for sale, that was rejected.” Go to Ch. 2100, see ToC for “on sale” go to 2133 or that general area, search for “reject” and just starting hitting return. You will come across the answer quickly.

Remember, do it fast! Don’t waste time reading. Read the table of contents in about 10 seconds, enter the term or phrase in the approximate spot and start hitting enter really fast (without reading) until something looks really promising.

Reply

428 ChristinaNo Gravatar January 11, 2010 at 5:52 pm

Here’s another thing about searching:

Use the CFR table of contents! Type in the truncated term at the very beginning of Appendix R, get a CFR number. Read that CFR really fast to see if the answer is in there, or if the CFR is long, type in a search term. If not in the CFR do this:

Go to section R of the MPEP index, at approximately page 95, there you will see a correlation of the CFR with the MPEP under “Rules, patent” You will not need to use any other part of the MPEP index but this section! This will tell you exactly where in the MPEP to find that part of the CFR.

Example: Question on application files that cannot be located. Go to Appendix R, the CFR, type in “locat” as the term. This takes you to CFR 1.25, if you don’t find the answer in the CFR really fast then go to the MPEP index at section “R” approximately page 95, go to CFR 1.251 under that section and it says it is discussed at MPEP 508.04. go there and start searching for terms, if necessary.

This is another really good search method. Note that the MPEP index is generally useless. The CFR Table of Contents (for part 1) is really good; in correlation with the “R” section of the MPEP index, it takes you right where you need to go.

The best practice exam for this searching technique is the 2002 April AM exam. Use the CFR, then “R” of the MPEP, and search for terms or phrases in either.

Reply

429 SNo Gravatar May 17, 2010 at 9:43 am

A very helpful tip. Works always. Thanks a lot, Christina!

Reply

430 ydhNo Gravatar May 31, 2010 at 3:01 pm

Thank you, Christina. I used your search method during the exam. It certainly contributed to my passing the exam. Thanks again.

Reply

431 CaseyNo Gravatar January 11, 2010 at 6:05 pm

What’s the difference between “CFR” and R appendix?

Reply

432 NidaNo Gravatar January 13, 2010 at 5:21 pm

Took it today (January 13, 2010) and passed. Repeats (non-2002/2003):

Titanium baseball
Mirror (perpendicular/parallel)
PCT filing dates
Appeal

Both AM and PM sessions were harder than expected. I had about 15 repeats and barely finished on time.

The R Appendix was a huge help.

How I Prepared:
- Read a 50 page outline (from ebay) just once
- Started practicing two weeks ago
- Did the October 2003 test untimed, and looked up every answer after doing the question
- Did the rest timed on freepatentbar.com
- Ended up doing the 2003/2002 tests about 3 times each, and the 2001 tests twice; scored in the 80s and 90s by the last day
- Took a break the day before; 10 hours of sleep the night before; breakfast and lunch on test day

I took Intro to IP Law, Patent Enforcement and Advanced Topics in Patent Law in law school. If you are completely unexposed to patent law or practice, I would recommend reading a basic, introductory outline of a law school patent/IP law course prior to commencing your official preparation. For efficiency’s sake, you should know at least the basic patent or patent application requirements before you even begin to look at a detailed outline of the MPEP.

This website was a tremendous help. I truly appreciate the contribution.

Good luck to future test takers.

Reply

433 Titu YinNo Gravatar January 13, 2010 at 6:55 pm

The 50 page outline (from ebay) is from the CD: <>—-100% Position Feedback. This CD is the best-selling and the cheapest price for your Patent Bar Exam.

Reply

434 Titu YinNo Gravatar January 13, 2010 at 6:58 pm

That easy useful 50 pages outline (from ebay) is from this CD: US Patent Bar Exam Study Bible CD—-100% Position Feedback. This CD is the best-selling and the cheapest price for your Patent Bar Exam.

435 Mike91No Gravatar January 14, 2010 at 1:19 am

Does anyone have a list of patent bar review programs and (maybe) can rate which is best? Thanks

Reply

436 Titu YinNo Gravatar January 14, 2010 at 11:53 am

No.1 and the best-selling & cheapest patent bar review program in USA is <> from ebay, only cost: $ 19.91.

You can Read its best-rate 53 pages outline just once, you get a big picture for US Patent Bar Exam in just 1 hour.

Reply

437 JamesNo Gravatar January 16, 2010 at 11:10 am

I am new here. It seems that taking 2000-2003 old exam is a must. Is there any link I could download this free? or any other most recent ones I could have as well?

Reply

438 009No Gravatar January 17, 2010 at 10:05 am

Just go to freepatentbar.com and check out their exam simulator, it’s free, that’s what i used, also download a pdf of the mpep (i think they have that as well). I passed about a month ago, using those sources…

Reply

439 EmilyNo Gravatar January 25, 2010 at 3:04 pm

Does anyone know whether, in the MPEP on the exam, the search function begins searching for a word wherever you are in the document? I thought I read somewhere that it always began searching from the beginning, but then I saw something above that contradicted that. Maybe the technology they use has changed. Can someone clear this up for me? Thanks!

Reply

440 Rolf SeichterNo Gravatar January 25, 2010 at 7:20 pm

Hi Emily, Rolf here, Agent 63, 542.
I took the exam in Sept 2008. At that time , the Acrobat PDF Reader was a completely different GUI than what I was used to with the latest Acrobat Reader version at that time (that fact might still be the case). Go to the tutorial of the Acrobat section which Prometric provides.
However, if you are VERY familiar with Acrobat, you will adopt easily to the different look of the User Interface. The commands are all there on the computer at Prometric, but organized differently with the Acrobat version being used, I guess especially with Prometric, for security reasons. I do recommend to familiarize yourself with your individual version on your own computer and practice to search the latest versions of the MPEP files and sections, 600, 700, 2100, 1800, etc..

I personally preferred to use just one word in my search, rather than phrases, and I believe that I successfully managed the look-up’s, and I had quite a few during the test.

I hope this helps. Good luck when taking the test.

RS

Reply

441 EmilyNo Gravatar January 29, 2010 at 1:29 pm

Rolf,
Thank you for the advice. Were you referring to the tutorial that you go through right before taking the exam? I just went through that on Prometric’s website, and it showed some screen shots of the pdf viewer and the “find” command, but didn’t let you try it. I’m still not certain about whether the “find” command starts searching from the beginning of the chapter, or where you are currently in the chapter. Do you remember what it was like when you took it? Thanks!

442 SRNo Gravatar January 25, 2010 at 4:41 pm

Does anybody know what PDF version the current MPEP is in the exam?

Thank you!

Reply

443 Rolf SeichterNo Gravatar January 29, 2010 at 1:42 pm

Hi Emily, Thanks for you note.
What I referred to is that same tutorial, which you have looked up. Yes, it does not let you click on the tabs, ii’t not active.

The overall functionality, however, is the same, except all the tabs are a bit different, at different locations. But, if you train lookups and searches with your own version in detail, you can adopt easily to Prometric’s version on the day of your exam.

I hope this helps. Good luck !

Regards,
Rolf

Reply

444 mdavis68No Gravatar January 25, 2010 at 8:28 pm

Effective on or about Thursday, October 19, 2006, the computer-delivered registration examination will make the 8th Edition, Revision 4 of the Manual of Patent Examination Procedure (MPEP) available on the computer monitor. As of that date, all questions on the examination will be based on the contents of the 8th Edition, Revision 4 of the MPEP .

http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/oed/exam/registration.jsp

Reply

445 vkNo Gravatar January 26, 2010 at 8:51 pm

took the exam today. passed. heavy on appeal and pct. had the titanium baseball and museum question as well as the mirror question as a prev poster noted. harder than expected and didn’t have a lot of time and never had a problem doing practice exams. its a track meet so don’t dwell too much on any one particular question. lots of repeats from the old exams that are on this site. this site was very instrumental in my studies, thanks!!

Reply

446 Tim MillerNo Gravatar February 1, 2010 at 1:11 pm

I also had the museum question. Passed using the info on this site and http://www.patentbarstudyguide.com/

Reply

447 Titus YNo Gravatar February 1, 2010 at 9:30 pm

I do recommend to familiarize yourself with your individual version on your own computer and practice to search the latest versions of the MPEP files and sections, 600, 700, 2100, 1800, etc..

The easy useful 50 pages outline (from ebay) is from this CD:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=180346442242&ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT

Reply

448 Jessica SimonsNo Gravatar February 3, 2010 at 2:15 pm

Took it today and passed. Repeats incldued

Titanium baseball
Mirror (perpendicular/parallel)
PCT filing dates
Appeal

Both AM and PM sessions were as expected. I had about 20 repeats and barely finished on time.

How I Prepared:
- Did the October 2003 test untimed, and looked up every answer after doing the question
- Ended up doing the 2003/2002 tests about 3 times each, and the 2001 tests twice; scored in the 80s and 90s by the last day
- Read the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide from http://www.patentbarstudyguide.com. This guide contains s list of recently tested topics, as well as a list of repeated questions which is more inclusive than the one on this site.

Good Luck!

Reply

449 Paul ColinNo Gravatar February 3, 2010 at 6:42 pm

This woman is the girl-friend of the product owner and is affiliated with the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide.

I failed the Patent Bar Exam with the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide.

I spent $ 29.99 to buy the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide before 3 moths ago , I tell you, no useful at all. Stay away from the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide! This product has so many typos and misspellings that I gave up reading after the first day – you just can’t trust the accurracy of what you’re reading when their are that many mistakes. The summary is just a cut-and-paste job from the actual MPEP and their tests don’t even have the questions broken down by chapter or indicate which questions are most often seen on the exam.

I wasted a ton of time in this product course and failed the Exam. Bottom line – don’t waste your time the Ultimate Patent Bar Exam Study Guide is a joke..

Reply

450 JamesNo Gravatar February 4, 2010 at 1:46 pm

any PRG users to pass or not pass the exam? I have a copy of 2009 and working on that. Please share and advise how I could proceed.

Reply

451 mr exNo Gravatar February 9, 2010 at 3:11 pm

In 4/03/AM/#8 The USPTO’s correct answer states that (E) is the correct answer since all claims have been twice rejected. However, claims 11-20 seem to have been rejected only once. Can someone confirm/explain?

Reply

452 NewYork TakerNo Gravatar February 10, 2010 at 2:02 pm

I took the exam on February 5th and passed. There were a number repeats, although not as many as I expected (and hoped for):

Mario Lepieux
Smith Laminate
Prior Art
Johnnie and Floor Tile
Hair Gel (Einstein version)
Smith and Jones
Bloc
Tribell
Piecemeal

I prepared with the following method:
- All the material here (very useful, thank you!)
- Very old PLI outline
- Bullseye materials (I thought they were very helpful)
- Patentbarquestions.com
- Took timed 2002 & 2003 exams at freepatentbar.com

I studied for a total of about 100 hours, but I took a number of IP courses in law school.

The AM section was easier than the PM section, but I still had time to look up all the harder questions.

Reply

453 LoraNo Gravatar February 10, 2010 at 10:41 pm

is it possible not look up MPEP (pdf file searching) at all in test? anyone passed this without searching durring the test? how could I make it or prepare for that?

As I am still in preparing, so I plan to do my best in studying and taking exam as many as I could memorize and make a quick/smart choose.. any suggestion or experience sharing will be great.

Reply

454 Tech PasserNo Gravatar February 10, 2010 at 10:58 pm

DO NOT try to take this test without using the MPEP. I would say there is absolutely no chance you can pass that way unless you memorize the 3000+ pages of the MPEP, along with all the appropriate CFR and USC sections. There is too much memorization. Your best bet is to take the available exams as many times as possible and familiarize yourself with the MPEP. You want to be able to find something as soon as you search for it, but you really do not want to try to memorize it. That would not be a good study method.

Reply

455 NidaNo Gravatar February 11, 2010 at 2:58 pm

For those who have been admitted, how long does it take for the PTO to confirm admission after you mail in the registration fee, oath and data sheet? I sent mine in 3 weeks ago and have not received any confirmation. Is this information available on the PTO’s website?

Reply

456 NidaNo Gravatar February 11, 2010 at 3:00 pm

Sorry…I didn’t intend for my comment to respond to the one above…

For those who have been admitted, how long does it take for the PTO to confirm admission after you mail in the registration fee, oath and data sheet? I sent mine in 3 weeks ago and have not received any confirmation. Is this information available on the PTO’s website?

Reply

457 MarkNo Gravatar February 11, 2010 at 3:36 pm

It takes a while – I passed the exam Oct 26, and filled out every form I received from them the day I got it (and sent back). I showed up on the list of patent agents on Dec 22nd. After they receive your materials, they have to publish your name in the gazette to see if anyone has any moral grounds against you – that takes a while. (you can check to see when your name shows up – there is some delay on that front as well – http://www.uspto.gov/news/og/index.jsp )

Reply

458 Tech PasserNo Gravatar February 11, 2010 at 5:03 pm

You can also check for your name here:

https://oedci.uspto.gov/OEDCI/

I passed in August, returned my papers in early September, was registered in late September, and got my certificate in late October.

Reply

459 JKNo Gravatar February 12, 2010 at 7:49 pm

Quick question regarding the PDF version of the MPEP that is provided during the exam.

Are the chapter titles available during the exam as well as the chapter number or is just the chapter number provided? For example:

1) 100 Secrecy, Access, National Security, and Foreign Filing
or
2) 100

Reply

460 Rolf SeichterNo Gravatar February 12, 2010 at 8:17 pm

Hi ALL, or et al, who are studying for the Prometric Exam:

The MPEP folder on the Prometric Test is exactly the same as if you download it from the USPTO’s web site or any Training Web Site.

The only difference: The User Interface, the tabs, are positioned differently, it operates a bit differently than your regular ADOBE Reader user interface, but you will see the difference when you log on to the Prometric Tutorial.

Reply

461 Emily M.No Gravatar February 13, 2010 at 10:23 pm

When you click the “MPEP” button from the test question page, it takes you to the MPEP, and there is a drop-down menu that lists the chapter numbers and titles. Then you click “open”, and the chapter comes up with the subtitles along the left-hand side. There is a button you use to find, which has options of case-sensitive and whole word only searches, and you can search up and down. The search starts from wherever you are in the chapter, and you can use “find next.” When you go back to the question page and then re-open the MPEP, it stays wherever you were before. (Just a tip – ctrl + f didn’t work to open the “find” function and I wasted valuable seconds because I was so used to doing that. Not a big deal though.)

Reply

462 Emily M.No Gravatar February 13, 2010 at 8:44 pm

I passed today, and this site was a great help. I used PLI and went through all the lectures, but the most helpful thing was going through all the old exams, and learning how to quickly search the MPEP. I had a good number of repeats – probably 15-20.

The repeats I can remember are:
Mario Lepieux
Laminate
Tribell
64.9% obviousness
Japan 45 days

There were more but I’m blanking. It was very reassuring that every few questions I would hit one I recognized. The rest were actually fairly straightforward. A decent number on PCT, especially 102(e) dates. One question involving PCT and what corrections would be accepted by USPTO acting as the international search authority – I couldn’t find the answer anywhere in MPEP. Also a lot on appeals, especially dealing with new grounds of rejection by the Board. A decent number on correcting inventorship. One I was confused by was a question asking from what sources essential material can be incorporated by reference. The answers were foreigh patent, foreign publication, non-patent publication, U.S. patent that also incorporates by reference, and unpublished pending U.S. app. All of those were wrong according to MPEP, but I chose the pending app because that was accepted prior to 2004 or some date. Also, if you haven’t already, check out the list of newly reported questions on http://www.patentbarquestions.com. I saw several of those.

Reply

463 LoraNo Gravatar February 19, 2010 at 11:07 pm

Thanks, Tech Passer and all.. I will work on that MPEP way… it seems that all 2002 and 2003 exams (all these 2 years?) are very important, anything else?

Reply

464 slNo Gravatar February 26, 2010 at 12:45 pm

I passed 2 days ago and it’s time to sell my PLI course!
I’m selling my used PLI course + bullseye + recent question software + etc(some material that i made during the study).
Is there anyone interested? Please send me an email.
catinea@me.com

Reply

465 ChenyanNo Gravatar February 26, 2010 at 9:16 pm

Free-of-charge audio lectures for those who are studying for the USPTO patent bar exam

Reply

466 Carl OppedahlNo Gravatar February 26, 2010 at 9:31 pm

The audio lectures are at https://www.oppedahl.com/patentbar/ .

Reply

467 zenaNo Gravatar February 26, 2010 at 9:20 pm

Hi Chenyan,

I’d be very glad to use the lectures.

Reply

468 supkanNo Gravatar March 2, 2010 at 3:44 pm

i passed yday on my first try. Very few repeat Qs, for sure not more than 6-8 in all. the repeats I can remember were:
-mario lepieux
-tribell
-japan 45 days
-laminate
-australia PCT (fwd to IB)
I had lots of Qs from assignment (mpep 300) and a couple from protest (1900). ALso some new variants of older Qs. some Qs i got are below.
-variant of new matter. amendment makes changes to spec and claim 2 but not claim 1. however, amendment to spec affects scope of claim 1. what shud examiner do.
(i searched in mpep 700 and found the answer. it was to reject spec on 132, and both claims 1-2 on 112, 1st para.)
-reissue oath fraud related Q (answer was from 1400 that if exaimer has outside/personal knowledge of a court action related to fraud for a patent, he can reject the reissue oath of that patent claiming “no error or deceptive intent”
-what can assignee who has not established ownership sign? (answer in 300, can sign small entity status)
- i had 3-4 pct Qs (one was for a 102e date, one regarding amendments to the drawing, one regarding filing an IA at the USPTO in on-english)

I will post other Qs as i remember them!

Reply

469 sNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 10:25 am

The application for the examination was inadvertently mailed without the return postcard. What are the repercussions?

Learn’t my first lesson before the exam:-)!

Reply

470 EmilyNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 10:49 am

I don’t think it’s a big deal. The return postcard is only for your benefit if you want to see when they received your application. You may be able to call the office (after giving it enough time to get there) to check if they received it, but I’m not sure if they answer those sorts of questions over the phone. I sent a return postcard with mine, but never got it back, and they processed my application fine. (I think my postcard was too small to actually qualify as a postcard so that’s probably why.)

Reply

471 sNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 10:56 am

Phew!!!

Thank you so much.

Reply

472 SwerveNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 11:05 am

I am looking for basic understanding about the Patent Bar. I am a licensed attorney. My undergrad coursework consisted of all pre-med requirements (1 yr of general chem, 1 yr organic chem, 1 yr phycis, 1 yr biology). I am thinking about writing the patent bar exam simply becasue I am bored of what I do and I am looking for soemthing new. Here are my questions:

1. Does anyone know from experience and knowledge whether my undergrad coursework makes me eligible to sit for the exam?

2. Could you please recommend some prep materials, courses, cost of those etc?

3. How much time does one need to prepare for the exam?

4. Is it worth it?

I would really appreciate any help I can get.

Thanks.

Swerve

Reply

473 Rolf SeichterNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 12:34 pm

Hi Swerve, go to:
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/front.htm
and look up page 6 and the following pages.

Regards,
Rolf # 63,542

Reply

474 SophieNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 3:30 pm

I don’t know much about searching for answers during the exam.

1) Is the MPEP what is searched, or is the USC or CFR also provided? In other words, what should I be more familiar with?

2) Also, is it necessary to memorize the titles of each chapter of the MPEP, or is it provided in the electronic version provided?

3) Is there an online version of the MPEP/CFR/USC (whatever is provided on the exam) that most closely mimics the version used on the exam? I looked on the USPTO’s website and there is a version, but it is split up and I’m assuming the version provided at the exam is not split up.

4) Finally, I’ve heard different things–some people say that they don’t have time to search for anything, while the freepatentbar.com outline says that the majority of questions are ones you need to look up. Can anyone tell me which is more accurate?

Any help would be greatly appreciated!!

Reply

475 EmilyNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 4:28 pm

Sophie, see my post on 3/2/10 on the “prometric patent bar” page on this site – it answers your first, second, and third questions. As far as how much you can search, it all depends on your preparation. If you are very familiar with the old exam questions, and the new questions reported on this site, you can breeze through those and you will likely have plenty of time to look up the harder questions. Of course some people don’t get as many repeats, and they might be more crunched for time. I had enough time left to search for everything I wasn’t sure of, and I finished the second half of the exam half an hour early because I’d already looked up everything and even double checked things I thought I knew but wasn’t positive about.

Reply

476 SophieNo Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 5:18 pm

Thanks Emily!! I’ll try to get as familiar with the old questions as possible.

Reply

477 Niguel QutierrNo Gravatar March 7, 2010 at 10:09 am

hi, sophie, you can find a patent bar exam interactive training kit-patent bar simulator List of over 211real questions and answers currently appearing on the computer version of the Patent Bar Exam at ebay.

478 Pbar hopeful 2010No Gravatar March 4, 2010 at 8:23 pm

I think I’m ready to take this thing next week (haven’t officially scheduled yet) but I recently came upon a link to Bullseye and their products page. From what I’ve gathered on this site, it seems “generally” good things I hear about it, and its a great supplement to PLI. One thing caught my eye on their products page and I’m reallllllly interested in knowing more about this lol:

**********
Current Questions – Price $9.99
List of 60 questions and answers currently appearing on the computer version of the Patent Bar Exam

This item includes the questions currently being repeated as test questions on the computer version of the Patent Bar Exam. This item includes 60 current test questions and answers. By memorizing these questions, you will likely recognize between 15-25 questions on your exam on test day.

************
Has anybody bought or used this? Is it similar to the questions found here under “Exam Questions and Concepts” and/or Patentbarquestions.com? I’m not sure if $9.99 is worth it, or if this is a good deal or not before I purchase?

P.S. They also claim that their “course includes recent questions tested between 2007-2010″ —> huh? lol, is this true?

Reply

479 DaVinciCodeNo Gravatar March 12, 2010 at 7:27 pm

Not worth it at all. They sent me repeated questions from ‘02 and ‘03, which you would know from this site for free and you would practice these two years anyway. There was nothing from 2007-2010 in what they sent me. I complained to Bulleseye, they didn’t respond. It was in Dec 2009.

Reply

480 LoraNo Gravatar March 6, 2010 at 10:42 pm

Follow-up on 359 & 360…
I am preparing the exam in the early stage… my plan to is quick-read through the material I bought from patent resource group and do the test… but I do not know if I need to or how to read some key MPEP materials for the exam. Please advise based on your experience.

It seems that it is very important to use online MPEP in testing.. how could I prepare for that when I am in this initial stage? do I need to study or how to study the MPEP? Please advise.

Or how could I exercise to make it more familiar? Please advise

Reply

481 Pbar hopeful 2010No Gravatar March 11, 2010 at 7:03 pm

Hope this helps you Lora (and to others), as I just passed it the other day! Skip to 5 if you wana jump to my exam experience.

* – everybodys experience may vary, but these are the steps I took, and I am fairly confident that it helped me pass

1) Did the PLI material, listened to the DVDs, and made my own notes (outline) for each chapter, and combined this into one huge Outline (all this took about a month or so). yes, each day seems boring or tough, but just stick to it (force yourself someway!)

2) For the next month, I did ALL the available exams posted on this cite from 2003 – 2000. First, I took all of them individually untimed, and then looked up the answer in the MPEP (they usually give a MPEP citation in the Answers). This helped me recognize key words/phrases that I could search. Your MPEP search experience builds upon each search you do, and this is how you slowly become familiar with commonly tested chapters such as 600, 700, 1200, 1400, 2100 etc. After all this, I memorized the answer to EVERY single question from 2003-2000. Now, some of you may be like “umm how or why?” – lol, trust me, once you see so many of these questions, your brain can immediately recognize the answer, and it’s stuck. It seems overwhelming (I know, cuz I thought there’s no way I could do this), but then you eventually begin to memorize the answer.

3) I also used this site heavily as well as patentbarquestions (Questions reportedly and Load Dump links). Regarding these sites, this is my advice: First, look up Exams Questions and Concepts on this site. After skimming, MAKE YOUR OWN NOTES OF THESE QUESTIONS (e.g. write down the question, then Look it up in the MPEP, THEN COMPARE with the answers given on this site). I can NOT STRESS ENOUGH this importance. Not only are you trying to understand the commonly asked questions, but you are also forcing yourself to look it up in the MPEP. Yes, there are 68 of these, and yes it will take time, but trust me: If you put in this effort, you will be rewarded on the actual exam.

4) This may sound weird, but I “studied” other people’s posts on here, as I found it extremely helpful. Make notes on these, or just memorize/understand them, b/c you will find some of them on the actual exam! Here are particulars I found. At the very least, please skim them! These are like 4-5 points extra you will immediately recognize!

55. luis
75. pdl
106. seas
123. mohammad
165. cw
200. sarahL
272. s
295. ash

5) Ok, I know you skipped down here to see how many and what repeats I got. AM was good, PM even better. I got 0 repeats. lol jk, i actually saw about 25-30 repeats (verbatim!) from the Old Exams. Then, from the Repeated questions on this site, at least 15.

Time for some quick math. I need 35 on each section at least to get the required 70. Let’s say I had 25 repeats, that leaves me 12 repeats/section. And 15 on top of that gives me 40 repeats for the entire exam. I need 30 more to get 70, thats it!

Here is what I saw
- Tribell, Japan 45 days, 3rd party submissions, Titanium Baseball, 52 Tables, Mexican National, Lip Gloss, Small Entity, CPA via Fax, Broom, Piecemeal, Best Mode
- Many from April/October 2000, April 2002, April 2003, October 2003 (know these exams by heart, and I’ll say you got at least 20 points right here);
- only a few (3 or 4) PCT, those were all in the PM section. Appeals (1200) had at least 5 questions as did Death of Inventor situations. Rest were 2100 or 700 or 600 or 200 or 300 lookups.
- I personally think, no need to look at exams beyond 2000. It’s not worth it. I dont think i saw anything from beyond 2000.

Here is what I didn’t see
- Red Ink, 147 claims, Mirror, Spanish Phone, Velcro, Costa Rica/Sweden, Door Knob, Fan/Lamp, PTO 892, Hair Gel ,Divisional Reissue

This site helped me a lot, so it’s only fair I help others out and give back. Good luck!

Reply

482 bartNo Gravatar March 11, 2010 at 5:53 am

Wow! There’s great patent bar information here. This is a great site!

Reply

483 JamesNo Gravatar March 12, 2010 at 2:05 pm

Wow… thanks ~Pbar hopeful 2010 !
This is very helpful to me, too. That will encourage me to study and do it …
Anywhere I could get as many old exams to exercise like you for free?

Reply

484 SNo Gravatar March 12, 2010 at 2:42 pm

I think you can get all the papers for free from freepatentbar.com

Reply

485 Pbar hopeful 2010No Gravatar March 13, 2010 at 12:23 am

No prob! For Old Exams, simply scroll to the top of this page and click on “Old Exams”. They are all in PDF and have answers and explanations to them. For current questions, click on “Exam Questions and Concepts”, each question will have a separate link where there are numerous discussions and explanations about potential answers.

Reply

486 GoliNo Gravatar March 12, 2010 at 2:59 pm

Hello,

I am not so familiar with patent bar. All I know is that I am taking the test, and I don’t know where to find the material to study from. I looked in the actual (official) website, but couldn’t figure out what to download to study. I appreciate any insight.

Reply

487 DaVinciCodeNo Gravatar March 12, 2010 at 7:33 pm

I am hoping to sit for the patent bar soon. People who have posted the new questions, could you also post the answers? Just by saying Mirror, Japanese, Perfume, baseball do not really help, since we don’t know the questions or the answers. I know I am asking a lot, but where do I get the answers to the new questions?

Thanks a lot.

Reply

488 Pbar hopeful 2010No Gravatar March 13, 2010 at 12:26 am

Go to “Exam Questions and Concepts” to find the current tested questions. They are all listed, I think aobut 68 of them. Each question has its own explanation + potential answers.

Reply

489 GoliNo Gravatar March 13, 2010 at 3:43 pm

Do I have to buy the PLI review books, or is there any other way to study for this test?

Reply

490 JamieNo Gravatar March 13, 2010 at 7:55 pm

PLI is the way to go. I used them and passed easily. You’ll probably pass eventually but it’s not worth the trouble.

Reply

491 GoliNo Gravatar March 14, 2010 at 12:46 pm

Thanx Jamie. Did u take their classes or just used their books and stuff?

492 LindaNo Gravatar August 24, 2010 at 5:10 pm

are you selling your PLI course materials?

Thanks!

493 JBagNo Gravatar March 13, 2010 at 8:45 pm

Just took the exam today (1st time) and I passed.

I didn’t spend a single penny on studying. I mainly used this site and minimally used patentbarquestion and freepatentbar to study. Honestly, I feel like I probably got over 90% and way over studied for the exam.

Anyways, I do not remember all the repeats but there were a ton (probably close to 50%). Some PCT (maybe like 6) and a good amount on appeals as well as anticipation/obviousness and citation of prior art. However, I have so many exam questions in my head from my studies that I cannot recall which ones are from today and which ones are from practice exams I took.

I know others have mentioned this but I can not stress enough the importance of knowing the 2003-2000 exams. I don’t mean memorizing the answers, I mean KNOW those exams, where to find the information on the MPEP, why the correct answers are correct and the wrong ones are wrong. Also, since those exams are based on a different version of the MPEP, there are some instances where the right answers are now wrong and in some cases, the wrong answers are now right so make sure you KNOW those exams based on the MPEP 8 edition Rev 4 (might be different if you see this post far in the future) not just based on the explanation of answers from those exams.

I took the 2003 exams twice and the others only once (starting with the 2003 exams, working my way down to the 2000, and then retaking the 2003 exams). However, other than the 2003 exams, I scored over 90% on all the exams my first time through. Two nights before the exam, I just took a look at only the repeats from the 2000-2003 exams that are listed on this site.

Anyways, the exam really isn’t that tough. Just put in the time and relax on exam day.

Reply

494 GoliNo Gravatar March 13, 2010 at 10:35 pm

I am not into study guides either, but for this exam since I have no clue how to study (what to study), I probably need something for it. does anyone know where I can buy PLI review books cds/dvds for cheap? Not many on e-bay.

Reply

495 Dave SNo Gravatar March 15, 2010 at 1:30 pm

I passed the exam on Saturday 3/13. This site and the wiki site are great resources. I don’t know if I would have passed without all of the information on the new questions posted on this site. Thank you.

I sat for the exam in Hamden, CT. The test center was good with fast computers and large screens. The only complaint I have is that there were many other test takers coming and going throughout the six hours I was taking the exam. It was somewhat distracting. Good thing I used the headphones.

My study program was as follows:
1. PES study guide (four volumes). This was good for the fundamentals.
2. Old exams, especially 2002 and 2003. You have to do the old exams as many times as possible and study the answers. This way you will know how the exam questions are worded (i.e. double negatives). These old tests also cover material that is on the test today.
3. This site and the wiki site. These sites are invaluable for the topics covered by the new questions.

I have no idea how many hours I studied.

On the actual test, I saw many repeats from the 2002 and 2003 exams. Probably 10 – 15 in the morning and about the same in the afternoon. There is nothing like seeing a word for word repeat pop up on the exam. You can answer it in 30 seconds and move on. Use the time you saved to look up other answers in the MPEP.

Looking at “pbar hopeful 2010″ 3/11 post, it appears that my test was very similar. So, I won’t repeat what is written there. However, I did see Velcro, 147 claims, costa rica/sweden, door knob and hairgel. I also had a bunch of obviousness and enablement questions.

Good luck!

Reply

496 JK LeeNo Gravatar March 18, 2010 at 4:39 pm

Hi Dave S,

In your comments, you mentioned about you were using “This site and the wiki site”. Can you please give the actual URL of the “wiki” site ?

Thanks,
JKL.

Reply

497 mdavis68No Gravatar March 18, 2010 at 7:52 pm
498 zenaNo Gravatar March 18, 2010 at 3:07 pm

Hi,

I have been reading posts on this site and I wonder how long does it usually take to study for the bar.

I have taken a leave from school (engineering) and have absolutely no prior legal/patent experience.

I saw some really good insights on what to read and how to prepare for the exam, but I am just wondering how long it took you guys to prepare for the exam just so I know what I am getting myself into and to set realistic deadlines for myself to hopefully motivate me get through this.

Could you tell me how many hours a day and for how many days you studied for the exam?

Thank you so much.

Reply

499 Dave SNo Gravatar March 19, 2010 at 12:22 pm

yes, mdavis68 got it right.

Reply

500 oosulaNo Gravatar March 20, 2010 at 3:39 pm

I will be taking the exam in the next several months, and I see that many people say that knowing how to search the MPEP is one of the most important things for passing the exam. Can someone elaborate on that? I’m trying to get an idea of whether I should start by sort of memorizing the different sections of the MPEP, reading as much of it as possible, or just taking exams and searching, which would hopefully help me to become more familiar in that way…

Reply

501 calvinNo Gravatar March 22, 2010 at 3:54 am

Read just important highlighted sections in this study guide or commercial study product. The hard part is narrowing down what to study, not sure expensive home-study products are worth the money so you could try first. These current and past test questions are the more important which you need to save a lot of time for after the general studying/reading.

Reply

502 calvinNo Gravatar March 22, 2010 at 12:20 am

I meant if you do the above, reading just highlights and then exams, you should become familiar with what you need so kinda BOTH. Don’t spend too much time reading/memorizing though, and run out of time for lots of exam questions.

Reply

503 zeinabNo Gravatar March 22, 2010 at 3:15 am

Hi Calvin,

When you say “highlighted sections” can you tell us a little more about what you mean. For example, the freepatentbar study outline says to read the AppendixR 3 times and then goes on to list other chapters of MPEP to be read …

I still have not finished reading Appendix R, but I am not quite sure if it is the best way to start preparing for the exam? At least, wouldn’t it be better to go through the outline notes first?

I am confused on how to start studying, especially that I am broke and cannot afford to spend money on study guides. I don’t mind hard work, I am just not too confident if I should follow what the freepatentbar outline suggest, or at least in the order that is suggested which is:

37 CFR S1
37 CFR S10
37 CFR S41
MPEP 700

And then last step is recommended to read the outline.

I am clueless, and cannot decide whether the outline actually is recommending that we follow the steps given, or it doesn’t matter … cause I don’t want to waste so much time reading hundreds and hundreds of pages and then finding out I did not need the information

So can you please tell us what you mean by “highlights” ?

Thank you so much!

Reply

504 SeanNo Gravatar March 22, 2010 at 10:07 am

These Links on the “study guide” page are NOT working:

3) 35 USC 102 (a),(b),(c),(d),(e),(f) and (g)

Reply

505 adminNo Gravatar March 22, 2010 at 10:11 am

Sean – Thanks for letting me know. I’m fixing them right now.

Reply

506 adminNo Gravatar March 23, 2010 at 2:27 pm

All set!

Reply

507 patjdNo Gravatar March 25, 2010 at 3:33 pm

I passed last week, thanks for the great site.

I am selling my almost entirely unused PRG study materials. This includes: 1) All 4 volumes of volumes of “Patent Practice” textbook,
2) Printed practice questions corresponding to each volume of “Patent Practice,”
3) CD-ROM with over 2,000 practice questions (really helpful),
4) Printed version of MPEP (4 large binders),
5) PRG’s “Latest Tips and Tricks for Success” for passing the patent bar on your first try, and
6) Binder with all handouts from class and my notes.

Price is 750 (paid almost 3,000).

Please respond to this thread if interested.

Reply

508 Paul CollinsNo Gravatar March 26, 2010 at 1:25 pm

I am very interested in your items. Are you an JD? from your ” PatJD? Which is law school graduate from ? Do you work? or just graduate this year? How long do you prepare for Patent bar exam? Thanks!

Reply

509 DaVinciCodeNo Gravatar March 26, 2010 at 5:54 pm

I am studying for the exam, and was wondering if anyone is interested in studying/discussing the exam over the phone or via personal emails? We can then publish what we found out about various things for others to also know. If this is ok to post it in this site, please send me your e-mail address, if you are interested in live discussions/studying. Thanks.

Reply

510 SNo Gravatar March 26, 2010 at 9:40 pm

I would like to study together…. my email is resrivi@yahoo.com

Thanks

Reply

511 GoliNo Gravatar March 27, 2010 at 1:59 am

is it ok to buy PLI from 2006?

Reply

512 A DNo Gravatar March 27, 2010 at 9:34 am

DaVinciCode and S: I’d like to study together. my email: patentbarstudy@gmail.com. thanks!

Reply

513 Rolf SeichterNo Gravatar March 27, 2010 at 9:51 am

For those Patent Bar Students who might be ready around June/July this year to take the exam: FOUND IN: http://www.ipwatchdog.com

In 2004 the United States Patent and Trademark Office modified the way it administered the Patent Bar Examination, moving from a test given either once or twice a year in paper form at a variety of locations across the United States, to a computerized examination administered on demand.
This year individuals seeking registration before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) as patent attorneys and agents can take the exam at the USPTO on July 13 or July 14, 2010. The deadline for applying to take the exam in person at the USPTO is Friday, May 14, 2010.

Regards,
Rolf

Reply

514 SophieNo Gravatar March 29, 2010 at 1:44 am

Passed last Thursday on my first try in San Francisco. Studied for about 2 1/2 weeks, as you can see from my previous post (didn’t have a clue then how to study for this thing). Thanks to the creator of this site and everyone who has contributed!!

Here’s how I studied:
Didn’t spend a dime. Old Exams: Did old exams 2000-2003 untimed. Looked up all answers for 2002 and 2003 to get familiar with the MPEP. Didn’t look up answers for 2000 or 2001 unless I needed clarification on the answers. Did 2002 and 2003 questions a second time, highlighting the ones I thought were tricky. Went through the highlighted ones again the day before the exam.
This website: Read through all the categories on the study guide page. Read through the exam questions and concepts the day before the exam. Never took a timed exam. Didn’t use any other sites, but I did look at the first few pages of the outline on freepatentbar.com to learn how to make a cheat sheet.

How the exam went: Made my cheat sheet during the time left from the tutorial. This helped a lot because it took me about 5 minutes to do this. ~10 repeats in the morning and ~15 in the afternoon, not including the ones that showed up in the exam questions and concepts page. Those mostly showed up in the afternoon. Here are the ones I got:

Red or black ink
Mirror
Missing parts-PCT
Spanish phone
Lip gloss
Indefinite claim using “high”
Piecemeal
Multiplicity
Japanese patent
Advisory action
Restriction

I don’t remember too many questions, but I do remember that some of the repeats were modified so that the last choice was none of the above, even though I know that wasn’t a choice in the originals. Here’s one I do remember that took me a while to look up:

When can an assignee sign something without establishing ownership?

Choices were:
small entity statement
request for status of an app
correction of inventorship
appointing an attorney/agent
can’t remember last choice

answer: small entity status (MPEP 324, VII)

The other questions were pretty easy to look up. There were a few where the choices were modified from MPEP language, so I had to search for key words and look at each one.

I downloaded Adobe 5 and used that version while studying, but it was still different from the version I got on the exam. Specifically, the version on the exam had each chapter listed and you had to click on the chapter you wanted from the drop down menu and click “open.” I wasn’t used to having to do this and if you don’t click “open,” you remain on the chapter you last looked at, so make sure you click “open” before trying to use the find function. Also, the version on the exam had every MPEP section and subsection listed instead of my version, which had only the main sections listed and you could then click on those to get more detailed sections within those. On the exam, I had a hard time with this because it would have taken me a long time to find the exact section I was looking for, so I used the find function a lot. It was easier to use find while on the first page of the chapter so that if the topic I was looking for was there, I could find the exact location quickly. Also, since you could only look at one chapter at a time, you could only use the find function one chapter at a time. On the version I had, I could search the entire MPEP for a word or phrase.

I had about 30 minutes left over in the morning and about 40 in the afternoon. I had time to look up everything and double check.

My advice: Don’t get too worried about memorizing all the answers to the old exams–as I said previously, I looked at the answers for the 2002-2003 questions 3 times at most. I really didn’t have time to do much more since I only studied for 2 1/2 weeks. Make sure you make a cheat sheet (I’m not sure if you are allowed to do so during the tutorial time like I did, but a proctor walked by me while I was doing this, so I think it’s ok). You really don’t need to put in that much time if you approach this exam strategically–I only looked up as many answers in the old exams as I needed to in order to feel comfortable searching for things in the MPEP. The 2002 and 2003 exams are the most important, so make sure you focus on those. Make sure you look at the exam concepts page. I got a lot of those questions and since I studied them before the exam, I was prepared and just put the answers that there was a general consensus about.

If you’ve taken the MPRE, I’d say you need to study a comparable about, but in addition, you need to be familiar with the MPEP. If you’ve passed the CA bar, this test isn’t anything to stress over.

Sorry if it repeated anything–I didn’t read the older posts. Hope this helps! Good luck!!

Reply

515 SiggyNo Gravatar May 30, 2010 at 12:23 am

Hi Sophie,

Thanks for your post! Could provide me with a link or tell me where you found the outline on freepantentbar.com? I have been searching the site and only found links to their exam simulator and old exams, but no cheat sheet or outline. Thanks for your help.

Reply

516 SNo Gravatar May 30, 2010 at 7:27 am

Like Sophie said, it was taken down a little while ago. It was really good. I would probably ask them to put it up again.

517 SallyNo Gravatar May 31, 2010 at 12:48 pm

There’s an “answer sheet template” on the usptoExam.com site. It’s similar to the “cheat sheet” on the freepatbar site. Its under the Resources tab at usptoexam.com

518 JimNo Gravatar June 9, 2010 at 4:09 pm

Anyone have the study guide from freepatentbar.com? It’s not on their website anymore as mentioned, and I was planning on using it!

You are authorized to share it based on the Creative Commons Share-Alike License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/).

Someone please help! My email is patents.dude@gmail.com .

I’ll throw it on DocStoc if someone sends it along.

519 MinaNo Gravatar March 29, 2010 at 3:44 pm

could someone please tell me whether this is a good deal or not? PLI patent bar review material except the cd with other exams for $400. I just want to make sure I am spending this money right….thanks

Reply

520 EmilyNo Gravatar March 29, 2010 at 4:12 pm

In my opinion, if you’re going to use PLI, you really should get either the CDs or the DVDs because they contain all the lectures.

Reply

521 patjdNo Gravatar April 5, 2010 at 3:09 pm

To those studying for the Patent Bar,

I recently studied for the Patent Bar using these PRG course materials, and I passed the exam on my first try (woohoo!). PRG provides a comprehensive study guide and extremely valuable practice questions that are very similar (sometimes identical) to the questions you will see on the actual exam.

I am selling all my PRG study materials. This includes 7 hard-cover binders, 4 soft-cover textbooks, a pamphlet, and a CD-ROM. More specifically, this includes:

1) All 4 volumes of the “Patent Practice” textbook
2) Printed practice questions corresponding to each volume of “Patent Practice”
3) CD-ROM with over 2,000 practice questions (really helpful)
4) Printed version of MPEP
5) PRG’s “Latest Tips and Tricks for Success” for passing the patent bar on your first try
6) Binder with all handouts from class and my notes

The only writing in any of the materials is in the first several pages of volumes 1 and 3 of the printed practice questions. There is no other writing in any of the textbooks (except for class handouts with my notes).

For more information, go to http://cgi.ebay.com/PRG-Patent-Bar-Review-Course_W0QQitemZ280487663914QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUS_Texbook_Education?hash=item414e5e192a

Good luck studying!

Reply

522 SallyNo Gravatar April 5, 2010 at 5:10 pm

PatJD,

Congratulations on passing the exam!!!

What were some of the new questions you came across?

Reply

523 BNo Gravatar April 12, 2010 at 4:39 pm

I have been wondering is someone can answer this:
How long does it take to receive a registration number from the day you pass the test?

Reply

524 minaNo Gravatar April 23, 2010 at 6:42 pm

I got the PLI study material, but I don’t have a schedule to tell me which one to study 1st and stuff. I was wondering if anyone here who has/had PLI could give me their reading schedule. It will be a big help since I have no clue where to start. Thanks

Reply

525 SophieNo Gravatar May 2, 2010 at 2:04 am

I’ve passed the patent bar and had my name published in the Official Gazette for approval for registration to practice and I didn’t expect to see my home address published. I supplied a PO Box as the correspondence address because I would prefer to not have my personal information out there, but now it is there for the world to see. It seems like maybe the PTO uses your home address unless you work somewhere and provide your business address, but I’m not sure. I was wondering if anyone else has had this experience and if there is any way to take the information off or to have it changed. I plan to call the PTO, but I’ve had little luck in getting a timely response from them. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!

Reply

526 SunitaNo Gravatar May 2, 2010 at 10:53 am

Hi,

I am scheduled to take the exam soon – and just wanted to say that this is an amazing site! Will definitely post again with questions after the exam. A quick question – how does one access the cheat sheet on mypatentbar.com site?
Thanks!

Reply

527 SNo Gravatar May 10, 2010 at 2:37 pm

Question from April, 2001 pm

1. Which of the following is in accord with proper USPTO practice and procedure?
(A) Upon request to convert a provisional application to a nonprovisional utility application, the nonprovisional application is accorded a filing date as of the date on which the request to convert was filed, but the original filing date of the provisional application is preserved.
(B) If a provisional application does not have a claim as filed, and a claim is not filed with a timely request to convert the provisional application to a nonprovisional utility application, the Office will notify the applicant and set a time period for submitting a claim for examination.
(C) A provisional application filed in November 2000 is entitled to the right of
priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119 of a copending utility application for patent filed in Great Britain in January 2000.
(D) A request filed in January 2001, to convert a provisional application filed in the USPTO in April 2000, to a nonprovisional utility application is timely if filed after the abandonment of the provisional application, i.e., after the pendency of the provisional application, but within twelve months of the filing date of the provisional application provided no petition to revive has been filed and granted.
(E) A nonprovisional utility application filed under the provisions of 37 CFR §
1.53(b) in January 2001, and claiming the benefit of the earlier filing date of a
provisional application must be filed during the pendency of the provisional
application.

Answer:
1. ANSWER: (B) is the most correct answer. 37 C.F.R. § 1.53(c)(3) requires the presence of a
claim to convert a provisional application to a nonprovisional application. The Office will set a
time period within which a claim must be submitted for the Office to grant the request if the
provisional application does not have a claim and a claim is not filed with the request. See,
“Request for Continued Examination Practice and Changes to Provisional Application Practice;
Final Rule,” 65 F.R. 50092, 50099, middle column, (Aug. 16, 2000), 1238 O.G. 13 (Sept. 5,
2000). (A) is not the most correct answer. 37 C.F.R. § 1.53(c)(3). There is only one
application, and that application has a single filing date, the filing date of the provisional
application. See, “Request for Continued Examination Practice and Changes to Provisional
Application Practice; Final Rule,” 65 F.R. 50092, 50099, left column (Aug. 16, 2000), 1238 O.G.
13 (Sept. 5, 2000). (C) is not the most correct answer. 35 U.S.C. § 111(b)(7); 37 C.F.R. §
1.53(c)(4). (D) is not the most correct answer. 37 C.F.R. § 1.53(c)(3) requires that any request
to convert a provisional application to a nonprovisional application be filed prior to abandonment
of the provisional application. See, “Request for Continued Examination Practice and Changes
to Provisional Application Practice; Final Rule,” 65 F.R. 50092, 50098, left and middle columns
(Aug. 16, 2000), 1238 O.G. 13 (Sept. 5, 2000). (E) is not the most correct answer. The
provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 119(e)(2) were amended to eliminate the requirement that a
nonprovisional application claiming the benefit of a provisional application must have been filed
during the pendency of the provisional. See, “Request for Continued Examination Practice and
Changes to Provisional Application Practice; Final Rule,” 65 F.R. 50092, 50098, left and middle
columns (Aug. 16, 2000), 1238 O.G. 13 (Sept. 5, 2000).

I am having a hard time understanding why “E” cannot be an answer too?

Clearly, 37 CFR 1.53(c) (2) states:
Such a request for conversion must be accompanied by the processing fee set forth in § 1.17(q) and be filed prior to the earliest of:
(i)
Abandonment of the application filed under paragraph (b) of this section;
(ii)
Payment of the issue fee on the application filed under paragraph (b) of this section;
(iii) Expiration of twelve months after the filing date of the application filed under paragraph (b) of this section; or
(iv) The filing of a request for a statutory invention registration under § 1.293 in the application filed under paragraph (b) of this section.

How can “Expiration of twelve months” be any different from the ” during the pendency of the provisional Application, unless the choice is partially correct since it is not accompanied by a fee?

Reply

528 GSNo Gravatar May 17, 2010 at 10:57 pm

Another Search tip:

This site provided very useful info and I really appreciate all those who have contributed to it. I wanted to expand what Christina suggested (in comment number 422) regarding finding the MPEP chapters related to specific “rules” (C.F.R.).

Given a specific law (U.S.C.), if you want to find the corresponding MPEP chapters, you can
1) check the “Subject Matter Index”
2) Jump to letter “S”, (U.S.C. laws are listed under “Statutes”)
3) Use the find function of Adobe reader and look for “U.S.C” – do NOT forget the “dots” in U.S.C.
4) You can see the correlation between the U.S.C. laws and MPEP chapters.

Reply

529 darkfireNo Gravatar May 24, 2010 at 1:52 am

I have passed the exam on May 19, 2010. First I must thank this forum for providing so much useful information. Here is my feedback.
I used three weeks to prepare. The first week I was reading the MPEP study guide borrowed from a friend. I believe there are a lot of similar materials available. Cannot say it helps the exam directly but it is useful to have a general understanding of the whole system. In the second week I went through the 2002 and 2003 exams thoroughly. I read the explanation of the answers carefully and located every citation in the MPEP. This is proved to be helpful for doing search in the exam. The last week went through this forum including all the post and comment. This is the most important part I think.
During the exam I found around 40 repeated questions, 30 questions about familiar items, and 30 questions which I had never seen. Therefore by finishing the 70 repeated and familiar questions will guarantee your success. I also had one hour in each section to do the searching, that gave me another extra 10 answers, so I guess I should get around 80 points.
Following are some questions I still have a little memory, I tried my best to write them down:
1. a clerk of a practitioner asks the USPTO in person of the status of an application of a competitor with the serial number, what the USPTO will do. Answer may be: the caller’s association with the application cannot be verified, no information con¬cerning the application will be released.
2. a new ground of rejection: what should the applicant do: reopen or rehearing. Another question is if the applicant submit amendment to the examiner and order a rehearing too, what should the board do: wait for the examiner or give the rehearing.
3. PCT: US provisional — IA — missing claim, at the provisional’s anniversary day, what should the practitioner do: (a) fax to USPTO (b) express mail to USPTO (c) fax to USRO.
4. who can sign: A and B are joint inventors, they assigned 40% interests to company C, and 40% to company D, who should sign? All of them.
5. A, B, and C are identified as inventors of an application, B’s address is an error, how to correct it (which answer is incorrect)?
(A) Submit supplemental data sheet with all 3 correct addresses and 3 signatures.
(B) New declaration, only changes of B’s address, only B’s signature.
(C) If A’s address is also wrong, declaration with A and B’s address, A and B’s signatures.
(D) Declaration identify A, B, and C, with addresses, only B’s signature.
(E) Identify A, B, and C, with all 3 signatures.
6. Drawing:
(A) must be formal when filed.
(B) cannot be substituted after filing.
(C) cannot be black/white photograph.
(D) …
(E) examiner can require a drawing even it’s not necessary to understand the embodiment.
7. what can be signed by an assignee without recording.
8. the inventor gave part of the interest to the practitioner as commission, the inventor then diseased. How it the power of attorney.
9. PCT, an IA has no abstract, after the search an abstract is added by the ISA, the applicant doesn’t agree with the abstract after reading the report, what can he do?

Reply

530 JimNo Gravatar June 9, 2010 at 4:11 pm

Anyone have the study guide from freepatentbar.com? It’s not on their website anymore, and I was counting on using it !!!!

If you still have it, you are authorized to share it based on the Creative Commons Share-Alike License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/).

Someone please help! My email is patents.dude@gmail.com .

I’ll throw it up on DocStoc if someone sends it along!

Reply

531 yqcNo Gravatar July 31, 2010 at 11:08 pm

new starter, where can I buy a second hand PLI home study material?

Reply

532 AshNo Gravatar August 16, 2010 at 9:55 pm

hi yqc…im selling my pli materials…are u still interested?

Reply

533 ashNo Gravatar August 9, 2010 at 9:44 pm

Hi im selling my PLI patent bar exam materials for $600 (+S&H). Please let me know if anyone is interested. the materials are current. includes lecture audio cds, study materials, workbook, exam software. let me know if anyone needs more details
Thanks!!

Reply

534 StephenNo Gravatar August 16, 2010 at 6:34 pm

I took the test today and passed. I saw a lot of repeats, at least 40%, there were some majorly modified repeats with similar fact patterns but enough changed to change the answer. Most of the questions I had never seen were not very difficult to look up. First half I barely finished in time, second half I finished with about fifteen minutes. I went slow because I was double checking answers, even ones verbatim because often times they put “not” and such where they shouldn’t be in an attempt to trip you up. If I had to guess what my “actual” score was I would say i maybe missed 20, but I don’t think I even missed that many.

I studied approximately 80~ hours for the exam over about 3 1/2 weeks. I started off at about 3 hours a day for the first week and a half, the second week and a half I was studying about 6-7 hours a day. First thing I will say is, if you’re a “self-starter” and don’t need someone to sit you in a desk and force you to read DO NOT PAY FOR THE CLASS. I spent $30 on a 180 page e-book off amazon. Although the book didn’t get in to the really detailed specifics, it explained the general topics to me in basic terminology so I could understand how all of the different parts of the MPEP interact. After that I went to the practice exams. I’ll repeat what’s been repeated here at least 100 times, KNOW THE OLD EXAMS. Even if you don’t see repeats, the same concepts are tested…by knowing the old questions and answers (as well as understanding why the answer is right), you’re learning the MPEP whether you realize it or not. I was extremely nervous going in, and yes I had a lot of repeats, but the ones that weren’t repeats I could eliminate at last 2 or 3 answers immediately because I understood the material well enough. Also, I saw about 10 of the questions from the “new” section on the exam, so definitely study those.

Buy this, it’s $26! You get it almost IMMEDIATELY. It will tell you EVERYTHING you need to know to understand the basic concepts, then you learn through osmosis doing problems. The PCT section of this book for example helped immensely in understanding the process. My personal advice is do not spend $2k+ on a class, and do not spend $600 on a home study course. The old exams are available on this site, as well as the answers….that’s all you need in combination with this book.

Reply

535 StephenNo Gravatar August 16, 2010 at 9:29 pm

The book is called Patent Bar Exam: The Ultimate Study Guide. It’s $29.99 on amazon. I would recommend it to anyone. As I said, it won’t teach you everything you need to know to pass the patent bar, but if you know nothing about the MPEP it is a great starting tool.

Reply

536 SusanNo Gravatar August 17, 2010 at 12:07 am

Congratulations to Stephen who just passed! I’m taking the exam on September 7th. Could someone let me know if the mpep is presented as a separate window so that the question’s answers can be viewed at the same time one is reviewing the mpep? I don’t plan to rely on the mpep very much at all, but since this will be my very first computerized exam, I’d appreciate any comments about problems. Also, are the pct rules available? Many thanks!

Reply

537 StephenNo Gravatar August 17, 2010 at 8:56 am

It is a separate window that you can size however you would like. You can only have one chapter of the MPEP open at any time. It was basically exactly like I was taking the exam on my personal computer using Adobe Reader 5.0.

Reply

538 StephenNo Gravatar August 17, 2010 at 8:56 am

Oh, and yes you can view the MPEP and the questions at the same time.

539 SwingNo Gravatar August 23, 2010 at 9:45 pm

Hi, I am preparing to take the test in a month. Do they still test questions on Chapter 500 nowadays?

Reply

540 EriNo Gravatar September 30, 2010 at 3:59 pm

Hi im interested in the latest PLI review course Home Study kit (complete set). If there is anyone who wants to sell it, please send me a contact ( eritanijp@yahoo.co.jp). Thanks!!

Reply

541 KenNo Gravatar October 12, 2010 at 2:09 pm

Anybody selling a patent bar review kit? If so e-mail me at kenneth.a.knox@gmail.com

Reply

542 cassbirNo Gravatar October 26, 2010 at 6:08 pm

I passed the exam yesterday!

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this great website. It feels super sweet to be done!

How I studied:
First I outlined MPEP 2100 (using the online MPEP) capturing all the headings and reading some sections, time consuming but worth it
Then I studied all the repeat questions listed on this site
Next I took all the exams from 2002 and 2003 as a closed book exam, then I studied the answers, if I had more time I would have done 2001 exams too.
Studied PCT, Appeals process, studied 102(e) flow chart in MPEP 700
I also became very comfortable with searching the laws (35 USC) and rules portion (37 CFR) for answers. Learning to use the MPEP index is very useful too.
I read through most of the laws up through 35 USC 121.
I studied certificates of correction, reissue, and reexam until I understood when each is appropriate
Also, I googled and found some patent bar outlines. I skimmed these, but some of them had incorrect information so caveat emptor.

The exam:
The morning session was definitely way harder than the afternoon so don’t let that rock your confidence if that happens to you.
I was surprised by how many questions were repeats. Study old exams!
Some of the new questions listed on this site popped up too, but I didn’t study those too much.
As expected, lots of PCT and Appeals questions. Unexpected, assignment and a fair amount of reissue questions.
I referred to the 102(e) examples and flow chart MPEP 700 a number of times throughout the exam.

Good luck to everyone!

Reply

543 JSNo Gravatar November 8, 2010 at 12:49 pm

I need a patent bar review course study material-PLI , anyone selling??

Reply

544 MSNo Gravatar November 11, 2010 at 6:31 am

Hey there,

I am might be selling as of this weekend. I take the exam tomorrow. If I pass then I can sell to you. I will share my insights after the exam.

Where can I reach you?

Reply

545 biolawNo Gravatar November 15, 2010 at 2:12 pm

Question – when working on questions in the Longacre books, is it better to have access to the MPEP or just try the questions directly from memory?

Reply

546 JMPNo Gravatar November 15, 2010 at 2:25 pm

I just passed the patent bar on Sunday, first try! Since this site was such a HUGE help to me, I thought I should also comment and share what I learned.

How I studied:
First, I completed the PLI home study course. This was very helpful for familiarizing myself with general concepts and procedures, and probably more so for me than others of you since I am not a lawyer and had not been exposed to IP law prior to this course. I did not do the PLI recommended post-course materials, nor did I take John White’s suggestions of reading Ch. 1800 twice and 2100 3X. This was a wise decision for me and allowed me to spend more time on appeals, reexam and reissue as others have posted these areas as being heavily tested recently. Once I finished with the course, I went through the audio CDs 2-3 more times during my 1 hour work commute. At the same time, and probably the most important part of my studying, I did the following: (1) took and retook the 2002 and 2003 practice exams and (2) noted and studied the subject matter that others have posted as heavily tested on this site.

The exam:
As others have mentioned, the morning session was much more difficult than the afternoon (I finished in the morning with just 1 minute to spare). Luckily the afternoon session had may repeats, some verbatim from the old exams and even more that tested similar concepts. The exam was not as heavy on PCT or 102(e) issues as I had thought. Also there were quite a few questions on assignment, reissue and reexam. There were 2-3 questions on maintence fees and small entity status and some questions on foreign priority. There were a fair amount of questions from Ch. 2100, but most were repeats from old exams. I think if you use the old exams as a guide and make sure that you know these questions as well as the concepts being tested with them, you should do fine.

Good luck!!!

Reply

547 nyamyNo Gravatar December 27, 2010 at 11:12 pm

Hi,

I plan to take the patent bar exam in 2011, and just find out this website. I saw lot of fellows here were talking about the study guide from freepatentbar.com. unfortunately, the website seems not working any more. Is anybody still keeping a copy of the study guide? is it possible to send it to my email: nycamydream@yahoo.com? Thanks a lot. Your help are deeply appreciated!

Reply

548 JapatwriterNo Gravatar January 5, 2011 at 12:22 pm

I just took it for the second time on January 3, 2010 and I passed. Now it’s time to give back to the website that helped me out SO MUCH. Anyone that is interested in passing–just follow the advice that is given by the posts here. I took the following steps:

1) Read through and absorb every study guide. For the most important chapters, I wrote notes on them, said them aloud and got tested on their study guides by a friend. Major chapters to focus on include 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 12, 18, 21, 22, 23, and 26.

(Appeals, ex parte reexamination and inter partes reexamination seem to be tested a lot more now than seen on the practice exams, so it’s good to look over the corresponding chapters)

2) Do all of the practice exam questions until 2000 or 2001 at least twice. The test can have dozens of repeats. You’ll hate yourself for losing points on the questions that you already encountered. When you get them wrong, spend time trying to understand the explanations.

3) Read the information on new and repeat questions posted on this website. Some people have a really good ability to remember their test questions! I truly thank them–because a lot of those questions seem to pop up on the test.

4) If you didn’t pass and if you have the ability to do so, GO TO VIRGINIA AND LOOK AT YOUR TEST. It is completely worth it to know what you got wrong.

———————————————————–
Question Topics that I Remember from my Test:
1) If the Board issues a new ground of rejection, what are the possible consequences?
2) Spanish/Telephone question
3) If you submit the requirements for filing a provisional application but your application is missing a drawing (Figure 3), what can you submit to make sure that it is still accorded a filing date?
4) A patent application was filed with two joint inventors. One of the inventors, Inventor A, assigns his half of the patent to XYZ. Inventor B refuses to do so. The patent issues. XYZ later learns that, of the 10 claims in the patent, 1-5 were invented by Inventor A and 6-10 were invented by Inventor B. The assignee and Inventor B want to split the patent. What are their options?
———————————————————–
The above may not be in verbatim, but those are the questions that I was vaguely able to recall. If I remember more, or if I remember more details, I will post them.

Reply

549 SandSKNo Gravatar January 20, 2011 at 5:40 pm

Hi Folks: Thanks for the great website and all the comments. They are very helpful especially to a newbie like me. I am planning to give the exam in June of this year and was wondering if someone can provide me any insight for what worked best for them.
I do not have any background in law.
My initial thought was to read by myself (Ultimate Patent Bar By John Watts), and do the practice questions as a lot tend to be repeated, but I want some opinions from the folks who gave the exam recently.
If you can suggest taking an online course (courses like PLI are very expensive) – self paced or any other book or studyguide, I would certainly appreciate that. Thanks.

Reply

550 DaveNo Gravatar January 20, 2011 at 11:18 pm

Just passed the exam today, thanks to the help of this site!

Selling my PLI home study course if anyone is interested, email me at dmk352@gmail.com. It’s basically in new condition. Thanks!

Reply

551 BergNo Gravatar March 2, 2011 at 10:51 am

Does anyone have an idea of how the test will change after April. What are the major differences between the MPEP E8R4 and R8? Or does anyone know a good site that highlights the changes? Thanks!

Reply

552 ELSNo Gravatar March 2, 2011 at 3:01 pm
553 zebrafishNo Gravatar April 5, 2011 at 10:49 am

Dear Patjd/ or any patent experts on this website.

As an established patent attorney/agent, what is your suggests for me to find a job as a patent agent or scientific advisor. How should I start my job hunting

Recently I passed the patent bar exam and in the process of registration to practice before USPTO.

I have Ph.D in Biology
I also have some 2 years experiment at University office of Patents and licensing.

Thanks in advance!

Reply

554 PatentBarPassNo Gravatar April 7, 2011 at 8:31 pm

Hey all, wanted to say thanks for all the helpful information and the community that has come together to help so many people pass the patent bar.

I took the exam on Saturday and passed on the first try. I spent more than a year of loose on and off studying and finally decided to get registered. Found out that they were going to be making additions to the exam, so I secured my exam date three weeks from receiving my notice. The bulk of my serious study was simply reviewing this site, the outline, the 68 recent repeats, and the 2001-2003 old exams.

I don’t know how much it will help with the current black out dates and the upcoming additional material that will be included, but my exam had to have been at least 50% repeat questions (broom, mexico, metal baseball, prima facie obviousness, etc…) either verbatim or just a reuse of the fact pattern with a slightly different question on the same subject matter. And like the other recent posters have stated KNOW your 1200 Appeals and 1800 PCT. There must have been at least 30 questions combined on my exam relating to these two chapters.

Again thanks for all the helpful advice. Best of luck to those up and coming test takers.

Reply

555 DaveNo Gravatar May 2, 2011 at 12:29 pm

I’m starting law school this Fall and want to get the Patent Bar under my belt. Anyone have advice about the new exam? Should I bother purchasing an old PLI home study course or do I need to cough up the big bucks for an updated course?

Reply

556 BobNo Gravatar May 22, 2011 at 1:34 am

Does anyone have an outline or summary of the new material that they would be willing to share?

Thanks.

Reply

557 jayNo Gravatar June 25, 2011 at 12:26 pm

“The House yesterday approved a bill that favors inventors who file their patent applications first as opposed to the current system that operates on a first-to-invent basis. The change will bring the U.S. into line with Europe and Japan. The legislation also takes steps to help the underfunded U.S. patents office deal with a backlog of 1.2M pending applications, which forces inventors to wait three years for a decision. The House now has to reconcile its bill with that of the Senate after the latter approved similar measures in March.”

Seems this will def. affect the later MPEP version.

Reply

558 CJNo Gravatar July 2, 2011 at 1:25 am

Anyone interested in selling the PLI home study course? Please email me at cjgalfano@hotmail.com

Reply

559 JNo Gravatar August 4, 2011 at 6:24 pm

Just passed the exam. I only used this website and the MPEP to study (with a couple law classes in patent policy). Thanks a bunch.

Reply

560 rob mouradNo Gravatar August 8, 2011 at 2:19 pm

Recently registered for the patent exam and I am looking for study partner in the Chicago area.

Reply

561 rob mouradNo Gravatar August 8, 2011 at 2:24 pm

Anyone in Chicago area interested in putting together study a group for the patent bar feel free to e-mail me at rob@mouradlaw.com

Reply

562 MariaNo Gravatar August 15, 2011 at 9:18 pm

Hello, this is a little less related to studying for the Patent Bar and geared more towards professional opportunities afterwards.

I am planning to take the Patent Bar prior to entering law school. According to the registration rules, if one passes the exam and does not send in proof of good standing with the Bar, then one is registered as a Patent Agent rather than a Patent Attorney. Obviously, I would not meet the 2 year deadline to prove good standing with the Bar if I complete the Patent Bar prior entering law school. So here is my question: will I be professionally limited in any way if I take the Patent Bar, become registered as a Patent Agent, and then take (and hopefully pass) a state Bar in the future? For instance, could I work as an
in-house Patent Counsel for Google? Alternatively, would I be able to change my registration to Patent Attorney once I passed a state Bar?

Thanks in advance!!

Reply

563 RKNo Gravatar September 26, 2011 at 9:04 pm

I’m a PhD scientist working in IP management and business development; and thinking seriously about taking the patent bar. I am curious about how the patent bar exam will change after patent reform is implemented. Will the info learned by freshly passed individuals be obsolete? Will practicing attorneys be required to pass a new bar exam that reflects the new patent laws?

Reply

564 Juan TamadNo Gravatar November 9, 2011 at 8:09 am

Are there any differences on the examination when you are applying for a patent agent rather than a patent attorney?

Reply

565 mattNo Gravatar November 9, 2011 at 4:57 pm

No.

Reply

566 CoryNo Gravatar November 11, 2011 at 12:36 pm

I just passed the test! This website was invaluable. My advice to future test takers: know all of the repeat questions by heart. You can answer a good 30% of the patent bar questions by reading the first sentence of the question. I was also tested very heavily on 2100 obviousness. Good luck.

Reply

567 lakshmiNo Gravatar November 16, 2011 at 3:58 pm

Hi Cory,

What study materials you used for the exam? Could you please advise me as where can I get those patent bat study materials?

Thanks
Lakshmi

Reply

568 Billing223@gmail.comNo Gravatar November 15, 2011 at 11:48 pm

Awesome blog.
Anyway regarding the Gadhafi comments… I agree. NATO is an evil organization that serves no purpose. “Money” and “Oil” are their main objective.

Reply

569 wjfNo Gravatar December 13, 2011 at 4:58 pm

Is anyone in the San Francisco bay area selling their exam prep materials? Please email with course, condition and asking price.
wj_fisher@yahoo.com
Thanks.

Reply

570 studybearNo Gravatar December 14, 2011 at 5:19 am

I just started the PLI course and found a pretty nifty way to watch the online PLI videos in half the time. Step 1: Download a flash-player speed up program such as Enounce MySpeed; Step 2: Turn on MySpeed and press play on the PLI video player; Step 3: To avoid excessive buffering, press pause after pressing play and leave it there for 5 to 10 mins (you can use this time to review the printed PLI materials); Step 4: Press play on PLI player and move MySpeed speed bar to 1.5 x or 2.0x.

I also figured out a way to play the PLI videos on my iPad 2 (which does not support flash). You just download an app that can support a flash environment and play the player through the app’s web browser.

Reply

571 Walter FosterNo Gravatar January 5, 2012 at 8:52 pm

Is there any good way to search for specific CFR’s in the MPEP PDF file?

Thanks,

Walt

Reply

572 MirandaNo Gravatar January 17, 2012 at 10:24 am

What would I need to take into account if I get an old 2004 PLI study course? Would it be worthwhile to spring for the newest version?

Reply

573 BfusionNo Gravatar January 23, 2012 at 12:20 pm

Hi all,

I’m a PhD (Scientist…biology + Physics) with a background in ChemE / Chemistry. I have about 3 months of downtime before my next job, and am thinking of taking the exam (ok, I AM taking the exam). Does anyone 1) have any patent bar materials they are looking to offload? 2) Any suggestions or templates of how they divided up their time studying? I’m compiling people’s comments of how to start wading through all of this, and didn’t know if someone had used some sort of calendar to keep track of what they studied, etc, etc.

Any help would be appreciated!

Reply

574 Mambo5No Gravatar January 23, 2012 at 7:20 pm

I have been using Bullseye and John Watts’ e-book, each costing about $30 online, as well as this site.

Bullseye contains a good proposed study schedule, and Watts is an easy read, absolutely packed with helpful questions, summaries, and examples.

Between those two items and the repeat/recent test questions listed on this site, I think you’ll have everything you could ever need.

Reply

575 BfusionNo Gravatar January 24, 2012 at 9:52 am

Thanks Mambo5. I have a feeling i’m not alone in feeling a tad overwhelmed the first day of studying. I think the rather chaotic order of the MPEP is what is grating my OCD tendencies…time to just learn / understand, and then memorize the crap out of the questions/answers.

576 Mambo5No Gravatar January 24, 2012 at 11:55 am

I think you’re right – there is no ideal starting point for this material. Just pick a pony you like and jump on the carousel pretty much anywhere!

577 Mambo5No Gravatar January 26, 2012 at 9:45 pm

Looks like today is the day for Passers! I also got the preliminary pass today, and now proudly wear the goggles and cape of a patent superhero!
A word about preparation. I used this site plus Bullseye plus John Watts’ e-book – all terrific. Spent an honest month studying full-time, after having already read the Bullseye guide beforehand. Compressed the Bullseye timeline to fit my timeframe.
By the last few days before my test, I was getting in the 90s on the old exams, doing them closed book.
The real thing was still quite challenging, I felt. I went through the whole test first and answered what I could “closed book,” marking the ones I was unsure of. This took 1:15 to 1:30. Then I went back through the marked Q’s and did the lookups.
I used all the time both sessions.
Knowing the repeat questions from here really helped!
1Two questions about new grounds for rejection from the Board on an appeal go something like this:
The Patent Board of Appeals (affirms in one Q/overturns in the other Q) the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-10, and also gives its own new grounds for rejection. The practitioner amends the claims to overcome all rejections. What actions of the examiner are in accord with the policies of the USPTO?
Answer choices ranged along the following lines:
Allow the Application
Reject the Claims
Examine only the amended claims 1-10, and following completion of that process forward to the Board for treatment of the new grounds rejection.

2A PCT app is submitted to US RO on Date 1, but is missing some drawings and the name of an inventor. The RO invites the applicant to submit the missing items. Applicant submits the missing drawings on Date 2, and the inventor’s name on Date 3.
What is the filing date for the PCT app? Ans: Date 3.

3When a Protest is filed, what items are required to be included. Items 1-5 were listed, including 1 a list of references 2 a discussion of the significance of the references 3 the protester’s name. . . 5 an IDS.
4Trade secret in envelope
5Accelerated examination
Repeats:
52 tables, ½ page each – the submission included 2 CDs (One for part 1, One for Part 2), Ans: the submission was improper because it did not provide copies of the CDs.
Examiner can reject a claim that the District Court found to be not invalid.
Potter B
Moondust eraser
Q7 variant – reclaiming benefit
Lip Gloss
Suspended practitioner
No small entity fee reduction for recording
Broom
Fan
Tommie and Joe
112 para 6
Indef claim using “high”
900 claims – Ans: phone call, select a few claims to examine
Which submission cannot be made with a copy of a signature
Spanish phone keypad variant
For which situation is a 1.131 affidavit NOT appropriate to overcome rejection
When is canceled matter in a patent app prior art
How many dependent claims are there? – there were 8
102(f) Q
102(g) Q
Restriction of joined claims
Q about whether a claim should be rejected on enablement or written description grounds
Bloc
Inert gas
150 degrees versus 300 degrees melting point

Good luck everyone

Reply

578 Juris PrudenceNo Gravatar January 26, 2012 at 10:03 pm

Congrats M5! Thanks for the success story and don’t get lost in the stratosphere as you soar with your cape!

Also, did you happen to see a Q on India and outsourcing? Did you have issues with looking stuff up in the supplemental materials?

Cheers to you.

JP

Reply

579 Mambo5No Gravatar January 26, 2012 at 11:42 pm

Thanks JP,
Haha – Not to worry – after tonight, I will return to to my day job as Clark Kemp, mild mannered engineer for the Daily Plant.

I did not see the India outsource question, and although I did have one KSR question, I did not try to open the supplementary materials after reading all the horror stories on here. Instead I just took my best swag at it “closed book.”

580 Juris PrudenceNo Gravatar January 27, 2012 at 12:38 am

Good one M5 – Guess you won’t be around anymore, but thank you for being one of the “my Pat Bar” heroes here!

JP

581 Mambo5No Gravatar January 27, 2012 at 6:39 am

Here’s my parting contribution, to hopefully give back a smidgeon of what this site gave me: I took all the repeat questions from old tests and cut and pasted them into custom tests with answer keys and references to where each question came from.

Please find the 4 practice tests below. I simply pasted them from my WORD doc. Hopefully you can copy, paste into your own WORD doc, and print out your own practice tests for repeat Q drilling. This really helped me.

1. 4.00.a.6. Which of the following statements is true regarding a product-by-process claim?
(A) Product-by-process claims cannot vary in scope from each other.
(B) Product-by-process claims may only be used in chemical cases.
(C) A lesser burden of proof may be required to make out a case of prima facie obviousness for product-by-process claims than is required to make out a prima facie case of obviousness when the product is claimed in the conventional fashion.
(D) It is proper to use product-by-process claims only when the process is patentable.
(E) It is proper to use product-by-process claims only when the product is incapable of description in the conventional fashion.
2. 4.00.p.19. Which of the following is true?
(A) A final decision by a United States District Court finding a patent to be invalid
will have no binding effect during reexamination since the PTO may still find the
claims of the patent to be valid.
(B) A final decision by a United States District Court finding a patent to be valid will
have no binding effect during reexamination since the PTO may still find the
claims of the patent to be invalid.
(C) Once the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determines that the claims of a
patent are valid, the USPTO may not find such claims invalid based upon newly
discovered art.
(D) If a patentee fails to disclose prior art to the PTO during regular prosecution, the
only way that a patentee can disclose later discovered prior art to the PTO after
issuance is by filing a request for reexamination.
(E) Once a patent claim is found valid during a District Court Proceeding then the
patent claims are entitled to a higher standard of patentability and the presumption
of validity can only be rebutted by clear and convincing evidence in a concurrent
or later reexamination proceeding.
3. 10.00.a.2. On December 31, 1998, Sam Practitioner files a notice of appeal in a patent application assigned to ABC Corp. after the examiner has rejected all of the claims on prior art. Within two months he sends in his appeal brief and three months after the examiner’s answer is filed the case is sent to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board). Subsequently, while reading the Official Gazette Sam notices that a patent issued to XYZ Corp. on October 26, 1999, contains claims which read on an unclaimed embodiment in the ABC application, which is an invention that is not within the scope of the invention claimed in the ABC application. The ABC application was filed one month after the issuance of the XYZ patent. Upon learning of the XYZ patent, ABC Corp. wants to provoke an interference by adding additional claims to its
application relating to the previously unclaimed embodiment. It is October 18, 2000 and Sam
comes to you for advice. Which of the following is the best and correct course of action?

(A) Since the ABC application is at the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences
already, Sam need only request that the case be transferred to the Interference part
of the Board where an interference can be declared between the ABC application
and the XYZ patent.
(B) Sam should file an amendment adding the claims copied from the XYZ patent and
the Board is required to enter the amendment.
(C) Sam should promptly file an amendment containing the claims copied from the
XYZ patent and request entry. If the Board declines to enter the amendment, Sam
should file a separate, continuation application no later than October 26, 2000,
containing the claims copied from the XYZ patent as well as claims previously
appealed, and then, to avoid the rendering of a decision of the Board, he should
promptly inform the clerk of the Board in writing that they have decided to refile
and abandon the application containing an appeal waiting a decision.
(D) Sam should file an amendment containing the claims copied from the XYZ patent
and ask that the interference between the ABC application and the XYZ patent be
considered while the case is at the Board.
(E) Sam should wait until the appeal is decided before filing an amendment to
incorporate claims copied from the XYZ patent and to provoke an interference.
There is no benefit to filing new claims since only allowable claims will be
considered during an interference.
4. 10.00.a.50. Which of the following is not a USPTO recommendation or requirement?
(A) Claims should be arranged in order of scope so that the first claim presented is the least restrictive.
(B) Product and process claims should be separately grouped.
(C) Every application should contain no more than three dependent claims.
(D) A claim which depends from a dependent claim should not be separated from that dependent claim by any claim which does not also depend from the dependent claim.
(E) Each claim should start with a capital letter and end with a period.
5. 10.00.a.23. Mitch and Mac are named inventors on an international application that is filed in the USPTO Receiving Office, and designates the United States of America. Mac now indicates that he will not sign the Request for the international application. Mitch wishes to proceed with the Request and seeks the advice of their patent agent. Which of the following answers accords with the provisions of the Patent Cooperation Treaty?

(A) Mitch’s agent should sign the Request and accompany it with a statement
indicating why it is believed that Mac refuses to proceed with the Request.
(B) Mitch should sign the request for himself and also sign on behalf of Mac.
(C) Mitch should sign the request and seek a court order to obtain Mac’s signature.
(D) Mitch should sign the Request and accompany it with a statement providing a
satisfactory explanation for the lack of Mac’s signature.
(E) Mitch should sign the Request and Mitch’s agent should sign on behalf of Mac,
since he continues to represent Mac.
6. 4.01.p.10. Sally, an employee of Ted, conceived of and reduced to practice a spot remover for Ted on May 1, 1998. Sally’s spot remover was made from water, chlorine, and lemon juice. On June 2, 1998, Sally filed a nonprovisional U.S. patent application for the spot remover, and assigned the entire rights in the application to Ted. Sally’s assignment was not recorded in the USPTO, but was referenced in her application. On June 12, 1999, Jane, also an employee of Ted, having no knowledge of Sally’s spot remover, conceived of and reduced to practice a spot remover for Ted. Jane’s spot remover was made from carbonated water, chlorine, and lemon juice. On May 25, 1999, the USPTO granted Sally a patent. On November 5, 1998, Jane filed a nonprovisional U.S. patent application for the spot remover. As noted in Jane’s application, Jane assigned the entire rights in her application to Ted. Jane’s assignment was duly recorded in the USPTO. The examiner mailed a non-final Office action rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 to Jane in March 2001, citing the patent to Sally as prior art. Which of the following, if timely filed by Jane, would be effective in disqualifying Sally’s patent?

I. An affidavit by Jane stating that the application files of Sally and Jane both refer to
assignments to Ted.
II. A copy of Sally’s assignment to Ted, clearly indicating that common ownership of Jane’s
and Sally’s inventions existed at the time Jane’s invention was made.
III. An affidavit by Ted stating sufficient facts to show that there is common ownership of
the Sally and Jane inventions and that common ownership existed at the time the Jane
invention was made.

(A) I.
(B) II.
(C) III.
(D) II and III.
(E) None of the above.
7. 10.01.a.5. You have agreed to represent an independent inventor in connection with a patent application that was filed in the USPTO by the inventor on a pro se basis. As filed, the
application included a detailed written description that, when viewed together with four
accompanying color photographs, enabled one of ordinary skill in the pertinent art to make and
use the invention. The application was filed with an inventor’s declaration in compliance with
37 CFR 1.63, a small entity statement (independent inventor) under 37 CFR 1.27, and all
necessary small entity filing fees. MEGACORP, a very large multi- national corporation,
licensed rights in the invention after the application was filed.
You have been asked to suggest steps to remove any formal objections that can be expected from
the patent examiner, without incurring unnecessary government fees. You determine that the
first color photograph is the only practical medium by which to disclose certain aspects of the
claimed invention, but that the substance of the remaining photographs could readily be
illustrated through ordinary ink drawings. You correctly recall that the Office announced in the
Official Gazette in May 2001 (1246 OG 106) that it is sua sponte waiving 37 CFR 1.84(a)(2)(iii),
and is no longer requiring a black and white photocopy of any color drawing or color
photograph. Which of the following represents the most reasonable advice to the independent
inventor?

(A) Submit a request for approval of drawing changes wherein the first photograph is
labeled “Figure 1” and the remaining photographs are cancelled in favor of
corresponding ink drawings labeled Figures 2 through 4; and immediately
withdraw the claim for small entity status because of the license to MEGACORP.
(B) Submit a request for approval of drawing changes wherein the first photograph is
labeled “Figure 1” and the remaining photographs are cancelled in favor of
corresponding ink drawings labeled Figures 2 through 4; and submit a petition for
acceptance of Figure 1 in the form of a color photograph along with three sets of
the color photograph, a proposed amendment to insert language concerning the
color photograph as the first paragraph of the specification and the required
petition fee. The photographs must be sufficient quality that all details in the
photographs are reproducible in a printed patent.
(C) Submit a request for approval of drawing changes wherein the first photograph is
labeled “Figure 1” and the remaining photographs are cancelled in favor of
corresponding ink drawings labeled Figures 2 through 4.
(D) Immediately withdraw the claim for small entity status because of the license to
MEGACORP and submit to the USPTO the difference between the small entity
filing fee and the large entity filing fee.
(E) File a rewritten application as a continuation application including a color
photograph as Figure 1, ink drawings as Figures 2-4, a new inventor’s declaration
and a small entity filing fee.
8. 10.01.p.1. A U.S. patent application discloses a first embodiment of an invention, a composition made of known materials in equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C. The application discloses a second embodiment of the invention comprising equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C, and an effective amount of D, a known material, to reduce excess moisture from the composition. The application also discloses a third embodiment of the invention comprising equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C, and an effective amount of D to reduce the acidity of the composition.
The application fully discloses guidelines for determining an effective amount of D to reduce
excess moisture from the composition, and determining an effective amount of D to reduce the
acidity of the composition. The application discloses that the amount of D needed to reduce
excess moisture from the composition differs from the amount of D needed to reduce the acidity
of the composition. Which of the following claims, if included in the application, provides a
proper basis for a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph?

(A) Claim 1. A composition comprising: equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C, and
an effective amount of D to reduce the acidity of the composition.
(B) Claim 1. A composition comprising: equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C, and
an effective amount of D.
(C) Claim 1. A composition comprising: equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C, and
an effective amount of D to reduce excess moisture from the composition.
(D) Claim 1. A composition comprising: equal amounts by weight of A, B, and C.
(E) None of the above.
Questions 11 and 12 are based on the following factual background. Consider questions 11 and 12 independently of each other.

Applicant files a patent application in Japan on February 28, 1996. Applicant files a PCT international application designating the United States on February 27, 1997, based on the Japanese application. The international application is published in English on August 28, 1997. The international application enters the national stage in the United States on August 28, 1998. The USPTO publishes the application on June 7, 2001 at the request of the applicant. The application issues as a United States patent on December 4, 2001.

9. 4.02.a.11. When examining an application filed on or after November 29, 2000 or any application that has been voluntarily published, what is its earliest possible prior art date, for the June 7th U.S. published application in view of 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) as amended by the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999?

(A) February 28, 1996.
(B) February 27, 1997.
(C) August 28, 1997.
(D) August 28, 1998.
(E) June 7, 2001.
10. 4.02.p.2. For purposes of determining whether a request for continued examination is in
accordance with proper USPTO rules and procedure, in which of the following situations
will prosecution be considered closed?

(A) The last Office action is a final rejection.
(B) The last Office action is an Office action under Ex Parte Quayle.
(C) A notice of allowance has issued following a reply to a first Office action.
(D) The application is under appeal.
(E) All of the above.
11. 10.02.a.1. In accordance with the MPEP and USPTO rules and procedure, an application for patent may be made on behalf of a joint inventor in certain situations. Who, by petition, may make application on behalf of a joint inventor who has refused to sign the application (“nonsigning inventor”), if the other joint inventor (“signing inventor”) executes the application?
(A) A person other than the signing inventor, to whom the nonsigning inventor has assigned the invention.
(B) A person other than the signing inventor, with whom the nonsigning inventor has agreed in writing to assign the invention.
(C) The signing inventor.
(D) A person other than the signing inventor, who shows a strong proprietary interest in the invention.
(E) All of the above.
12. 10.02.p.1. Which of the following is not in accordance with the provisions of the MPEP?

(A) Where joint inventors are named, the examiner should not inquire of the patent applicant concerning the inventors and the invention dates for the subject matter of the various claims until it becomes necessary to do so in order to properly examine the application.
(B) Under 35 USC 119(a), the foreign priority benefit may be claimed to any foreign application that names a U.S. inventor as long as the U.S. named inventor was the inventor of the foreign application invention and 35 USC 119(a)-(d) requirements are met.
(C) Where two or more foreign applications are combined in a single U.S. application, to take advantage of the changes to 35 USC 103 or 35 USC 116, the U.S. application may claim benefit under 35 USC 119(a) to each of the foreign applications provided all the requirements of 35 USC 119(a)-(d) are met.
(D) One of the conditions for benefit under 35 USC 119(a) is that the foreign application must be for the same or a nonobvious improvement of the invention described in the United States application.
(E) If a foreign application for which priority is being claimed under 35 USC 119 is filed in a country which does not afford similar privileges in the case of applications filed in the United States or to citizens of the United States and the foreign country is not a WTO member country, any claim for the foreign priority thereto by a U.S. application will not be effective.
13. 4.02.a.1. In accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP, which of the following statements is most correct?

(A) The same evidence sufficient to establish a constructive reduction to practice is necessarily also sufficient to establish actual reduction to practice.
(B) Proof of constructive reduction to practice does not require sufficient disclosure to satisfy the “how to use” and “how to make” requirements of 35 USC 112, first paragraph.
(C) A process is reduced to actual practice when it is successfully performed.
(D) The diligence of 35 USC 102(g) requires an inventor to drop all other work and concentrate on the particular invention.
(E) The diligence of 35 USC 102(g) does not impose on a registered practitioner any need for diligence in preparing and filing a patent application inasmuch as such the practitioner’s acts do not inure to the benefit of the inventor.

14. 4.03.p.3. In accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures in the MPEP, in which of the following instances is the reference properly available as prior art under 35 USC 102(d)?

(A) A U.S. patent application is filed within the one year anniversary date of the filing date of the foreign application. The reference is the foreign application.
(B) The applicant files a foreign application, later timely files a U.S. application claiming priority based on the foreign application, and then files a continuation-in-part (CIP) application, and the claims in the CIP are not entitled to the filing date of the U.S. parent application. The foreign application issues as a patent before the filing date of the CIP application and is used to reject the claims directed to the added subject matter under 35 USC 102(d)/103. The reference is the foreign application.
(C) The applicant files a foreign application, and later timely files a U.S. application claiming priority based on the foreign application. The examined foreign application has been allowed by the examiner and has not been published before the U.S. application was filed. The reference is the foreign application.
(D) The reference is a defensive publication.
(E) All of the above.
15. 10.03.a.3. Inventor Joe is anxious to get a patent with the broadest claim coverage possible for the invention. Joe retained a registered practitioner, Jane, to obtain the advantage of legal counsel in obtaining broad protection. Jane filed a patent application for the invention. The inventor heard that, although patent prosecution is conducted in writing, it is possible to get interviews with examiners. Joe believes an interview might hasten the grant of a patent by providing the examiner a better understanding of the true novelty of the invention. Which of the following are consistent with the patent law, rules and procedures as related by the MPEP regarding usage of interviews?
(A) Prior to the first Office action being mailed the inventor calls the examiner to whom the application is docketed to offer help in understanding the specification.
(B) After receiving the first Office action Jane calls the examiner for an interview for the purpose of clarifying the structure and operation of the invention as claimed and disclosed, because the examiner’s analysis regarding patentability in the rejection is novel and suggests that the examiner is interpreting the claimed invention in a manner very different from the inventor’s intent.
(C) Jane has Larry, a registered practitioner in the Washington D.C. area, who is more familiar with interview practice to call the examiner. Jane gives Larry a copy of the first Office action, which suggests that the primary examiner’s analysis is incorrect, and offers to explain why. Jane instructs Larry that because Larry is unfamiliar with the inventor, Larry should not agree to possible ways in which the claims could be modified, or at least indicate to the examiner that Jane would have to approve of any such agreement.
(D) Jane calls the primary examiner after receiving the final rejection, demanding that the examiner withdraw the finality of the final action. When the examiner states that the final rejection is proper, Jane demands an interview as a matter of right to explain the arguments.
(E) (B) and (D)
16. 10.03.p.1. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, for a nonprovisional application to receive a filing date in the USPTO under 37 CFR 1.53(b), all of the following must be filed except:

(A) The basic filing fee required by 37 CFR 1.16(a).
(B) A specification as prescribed by the first paragraph of 35 USC 112.
(C) A description pursuant to 37 CFR 1.71.
(D) At least one claim pursuant to 37 CFR 1.75.
(E) Any drawing required by 37 CFR 1.81(a).
17. 4.00.a.47. Which of the following, if any, is true?
(A) The loser in an interference in the PTO is estopped from later claiming he or she
was the first to invent in a Federal District Court since the loser must win in the
PTO or he/she will lose the right to contest priority.
(B) A person being sued for infringement may file a request for reexamination
without first obtaining the permission of the Court in which the litigation is taking
place.
(C) A practitioner may not represent spouses, family members or relatives before the
PTO since such representation inherently creates a conflict of interest and a
practitioner is likely to engage in favoritism over his/her other clients.
(D) Employees of the PTO may not apply for a patent during the period of their
employment and for two years thereafter.
(E) None of the above.
18. 4.00.p.44. Which of the following statements best correctly describes current PTO practice and procedure?

(A) Where a patent discloses subject matter being claimed in an application
undergoing examination, if the patent’s designation of inventorship differs from
that of the application, then the patent’s designation of inventorship does not raise
a presumption of inventorship regarding the subject matter disclosed but not
claimed in the patent so as to justify a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f).
(B) The fact that a claim recites various components, all of which can be
argumentatively assumed to be old, provides a proper basis for a rejection under
35 U.S.C. § 102(f).
(C) A person can be an inventor without having contributed to the conception of the
invention.
(D) In arriving at conception, an inventor may not consider and adopt ideas and
materials derived from other sources such as an employee or hired consultant.
(E) It is essential for the inventor to be personally involved in reducing the invention
to actual practice.
19. 4.01.a.40. In June 1998, Jack and Jill, a married couple, are vacationing in Vietnam (not a WTO country) when they encounter a man selling bamboo knives for cleaning fish. The particular curvature of the bamboo both lends support to the knife to prevent it from bending and breaking and facilitates cleaning inside the fish. Jill takes a picture of Jack with the knife cleaning the fish. Subsequently, in November 1998, when Jack returns to the United States he begins to make and sell an identical knife to the one seen in Vietnam. In July 1999, he files a patent application claiming the nearly identical knife. Jack discloses no prior art during the prosecution of his application and fails to mention the knife he saw in Vietnam. The examiner finds no prior art similar to the claimed knife, and Jack is awarded a patent in December 2000. Meanwhile, Jill divorces Jack, and associates with Sam. Unfortunately, Sam is penniless. To raise cash, Sam and Jill begin selling a knife identical to the one Jack produces, only Sam and Jill make their knife out of plastic. The knives of Sam and Jill sell like hotcakes. Jack sues for infringement. Jill and Sam come to you for advice. Which of the following is not true?

(A) Jack is entitled to patent protection since Vietnam is not a WTO country and
evidence of the Vietnamese knife cannot be used against him to reject his patent
claims.
(B) Jack had a duty under 37 C.F.R. §1.56 to disclose his discovery of the bamboo
knife in Vietnam to the examiner during the original patent prosecution.
(C) Since the use in Vietnam was not in this country, it does not constitute a public
use bar under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).
(D) If Jill’s attorney files a request for reexamination, it will be denied because the
picture is not a patent or printed publication.
(E) Although Jack marketed the invention before obtaining a patent, the patent claims
cannot be invalidated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) since Jack’s making and selling of
the knife cannot be used against him under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a).
20. 10.01.a.30. Which of the following is most likely to be considered in a proper obviousness determination?
(A) Evidence demonstrating the manner in which the invention was made.
(B) Evidence that a combination of prior art teachings, although technically
compatible, would not be made by businessmen for economic reasons.
(C) Evidence demonstrating the level of ordinary skill in the art.
(D) Evidence that one of ordinary skill in the art, after reading Kat’s application,
would readily be able to make and use Kat’s invention without undue
experimentation.
(E) Evidence that the distance finder described in the July 2000 golf magazine has
enjoyed great commercial success.
21. 10.01.p.46. According to USPTO rules and procedure, which of the following can be overcome by an affidavit under 37 CFR 1.131?

(A) A rejection properly based on statutory double patenting.
(B) A rejection properly made under 35 U.S.C. § 102(d) based on a foreign patent
granted in a non-WTO country.
(C) A rejection properly made under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) based on a journal article
dated one month prior to the effective filing date of the U.S. patent application.
Applicant has clearly admitted on the record during the prosecution of the
application that subject matter in the journal article relied on by the examiner is
prior art.
(D) A rejection properly made under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based on a U.S. patent that
issued 18 months before the effective filing date of the application. The patent
discloses, but does not claim, the invention.
(E) None of the above.
22. 4.02.a.50. Which of the following is not required in order for a foreign application that has matured into a foreign patent to qualify as a reference under 35 U.S.C. § 102(d)?

(A) The foreign application must have actually been published before the
filing of an application in the United States, but the patent rights granted
need not be enforceable.
(B) The foreign application must be filed more than 12 months before the
effective filing date of the United States application.
(C) The foreign and United States applications must be filed by the same
applicant, his or her legal representatives or assigns.
(D) The foreign application must have actually issued as a patent or inventor’s
certificate before the filing of an application in the United States. It need
not be published but the patent rights granted must be enforceable.
(E) The same invention must be involved.
23. 4.02.p.38. Which of the following can correct the inventorship of a patent application in
accordance with proper USPTO practice and procedure?
(A) An unexecuted nonprovisional application was filed January 3, 2001
naming Jones and Smith as inventors. Smith was named an inventor in
error. A Notice to File Missing Parts of Application was mailed by the
Office, that requested a surcharge and an executed oath or declaration
under 37 CFR 1.63 by Jones and Smith. A registered practitioner in
timely response to the Notice submitted the requested surcharge and a
declaration under 37 CFR 1.63 that named only Jones as the inventor,
which declaration was only executed by Jones. The registered practitioner
had determined that a request to correct inventorship under 37 CFR
1.48(a) was unnecessary. No papers were submitted, by Smith, clarifying
that she is not an inventor.
(B) A nonprovisional application was filed January 3, 2001 with a declaration
under 37 CFR 1.63 naming Jones and Smith as inventors, which
declaration was signed only by Jones. Smith was named an inventor in
error. A Notice to File Missing Parts of Application was mailed by the
Office that requested a surcharge and an executed oath or declaration by
Smith. A registered practitioner timely responded to the Notice by
submitting the requested surcharge and a new declaration under 37 CFR
1.63 that identified Jones as the sole inventor, which declaration was
executed only by Jones.
(C) A nonprovisional application was filed February 28, 2000 that improperly
named Jones as the sole inventor in a declaration under 37 CFR 1.63.
Only Jones executed the declaration. Applicant need only re- file the
application as a continued prosecution application naming the correct
inventorship of Jones and Smith in the new application’s transmittal letter.
(D) A continuation application was filed under 37 CFR 1.53(b) using a copy
of an executed declaration from the prior application for which a
continuation was filed to correct the inventorship. The continuation
application papers were accompanied by a request by a registered
practitioner, in the continuation application transmittal paper, that Smith,
named as an inventor in the prior application, be deleted as an inventor in
the continuation application.
(E) (A) and (D).
24. 10.02.a.50. If a reissue application is filed within two years of the original patent grant, the applicant may subsequently broaden the claims during prosecution of the pending reissue prosecution beyond the two year limit, ________________________________.
(A) if the applicant indicates in the oath accompanying the reissue application that the claims will be broadened.
(B) if an intent to broaden is indicated in the reissue application at any time within three years from the patent grant.
(C) if the reissue application is filed on the 2-year anniversary date from the patent grant, even though an intent to broaden the claims was not indicated in the application at that time.
(D) if the reissue application is a continuing reissue application of a parent reissue application, and neither reissue application contained an indication of an intent to broaden the claims until 4 years after the patent grant..
(E) provided, absent any prior indication of intent to broaden, an attempt is made to convert the reissue into a broadening reissue concurrent with the presentation of broadening claims beyond the two year limit.

25. 10.02.p.47. A registered practitioner’s client, Apex Mfg. Corporation, bought the entire assets of Pinnacle Mfg. Corporation. Pinnacle gave Apex a list of its patent applications but did not maintain records of the patent assignments. Apex wishes to know which of the assignment documents, if any, of the pending patent applications in Pinnacle’s patent portfolio were never recorded. In accordance with the MPEP, which of the following actions could the practitioner rely upon to most expeditiously answer this question?

(A) Request certified copies of the patent applications as filed.
(B) Request certified copies of the assignment documents of record of the patent applications.
(C) Request certified copies of the patent applications as filed accompanied by the fees set forth in 37 CFR 1.19(b)(1)(i).
(D) Request certified copies of the patent applications as filed accompanied by the fees set forth in 37 CFR 1.19(b)(1)(ii).
(E) Request certified copies of the assignment documents of record of the patent applications accompanied by the fees set forth in 37 CFR 1.19(b)(5).

26. 4.03.a.49. An examiner has advanced a reasonable basis for questioning the adequacy of the enabling disclosure in the specification of your client’s patent application, and has properly rejected all the claims in the application. The claims in the application are drawn to a computer program system. In accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP, the rejection should be overcome by submitting _____________

(A) factual evidence directed to the amount of time and effort and level of knowledge required for the practice of the invention from the disclosure alone.
(B) arguments by you (counsel) alone, inasmuch as they can take the place of evidence in the record.
(C) an affidavit under 37 CFR 1.132 by an affiant, who is more than a routineer in the art, submitting few facts to support his conclusions on the ultimate legal question of sufficiency, i.e., that the system “could be constructed.”
(D) opinion evidence directed to the ultimate legal issue of enablement.
(E) patents to show the state of the art for purposes of enablement where these patents have an issue date later than the effective filing date of the application under consideration.
27. 4.03.p.48. In accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP, which of the following statements regarding a proper prior art reference is true?

(A) Canceled matter in the application file of a U.S. patent is a prior art reference as of the filing date under 35 USC 102(e).
(B) Where a patent refers to and relies on the disclosure of a copending subsequently abandoned application, such disclosure is not available as a reference.
(C) Where the reference patent claims the benefit of an earlier filed, copending but subsequently abandoned application which discloses subject matter in common with the patent, and the abandoned application has an enabling disclosure for the common subject matter and the claimed matter in the reference patent, the effective date of the reference patent as to the common subject matter is the filing date of the reference patent.
(D) Matter canceled from the application file wrapper of a U.S. patent may be used as prior art as of the patent date.
(E) All foreign patents are available as prior art as of the date they are translated into English.

28. 10.03.a.50. Ben hires a registered practitioner to prosecute his patent application. The practitioner drafted an application having fifteen claims. Claim 1 is independent, and each of claims 2-15 are singularly dependent upon claim 1. A proper non-final Office action is mailed to the practitioner. Following consultation with Ben, the practitioner timely prepared, signed, and filed a reply to the Office action containing an amendment that does not add new matter, but does add claims 16-27. Each of claims 16-27 is directed to the same invention sought to be patented through claims 1-15. The dependency of each of claims 16-27 reads “any of claims 5-15.” For purposes of fee calculation in accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, how many total claims are contained in the application after the amendment is entered?

(A) One hundred thirty-six.
(B) One hundred thirty-five.
(C) Twenty-seven.
(D) One hundred forty-seven.
(E) Fifteen.

29. 10.03.p.50.. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, which of the following facts are required for 35 USC 102(g) to form the basis for an ex parte rejection:

(1) The subject matter at issue has been actually reduced to practice by another before the applicant’s invention.
(2) There has been no abandonment, suppression or concealment.
(3) A U.S. patent application for the subject matter at issue has been filed by another prior to the filing of the applicant’s application.
(4) A U.S. patent has been granted for the subject matter at issue prior to the filing of the applicant’s application.

(A) Fact (1) only
(B) Fact (2) only
(C) Facts (1) and (2)
(D) Facts (1), (2) and (3)
(E) Facts (1), (2), (3) and (4)
30. 4.00.a.9. A non-final Office action contains, among other things, a restriction requirement between
two groups of claims, (Group 1 and Group 2). Which of the following, if included in a timely
reply under 37 C.F.R. § 1.111, preserves applicant’s right to petition the Commissioner to review
the restriction requirement?

I. Applicant’s entire reply to the restriction requirement is: “The examiner erred in
distinguishing between Group 1 and Group 2, and therefore the restriction
requirement is respectfully traversed and no election is being made, in order that
applicant’s right to petition the Commissioner to review the restriction
requirement is preserved.”
II. Applicant’s entire reply to the restriction requirement is: “Applicant elects
Group 1 and respectfully traverses the restriction requirement, because the
examiner erred in requiring a restriction between Group 1 and Group 2.”
III. Applicant’s reply distinctly points out detailed reasons why applicant believes the
examiner erred in requiring a restriction between Group 1 and Group 2, and
additionally sets forth, “Applicant therefore respectfully traverses the restriction
requirement and no election is being made, in order that applicant’s right to
petition the Commissioner to review the restriction requirement is preserved.”
IV. Applicant’s reply distinctly points out detailed reasons why applicant believes the
examiner erred in requiring a restriction between Group 1 and Group 2, and
additionally sets forth, “Applicant therefore respectfully traverses the restriction
requirement and elects Group 2.

(A) I.
(B) II.
(C) III.
(D) IV.
(E) None of the above.
31. 4.00.p.21. Mr. Roberts, an American citizen touring a vineyard, saw a unique grape-squeezing machine in France. The machine was highly efficient, and produced excellent wine. The vineyard owner was not hiding the machine. It was out of public view and was the only one of its kind. The vineyard owner had built it himself several years earlier, and no drawing or
technical description of the machine was ever made. The vineyard made only local sales of its
wines. Using his photographic memory, Roberts went back to his hotel and made technical
drawings of what he had seen. Upon his return to the United States, Roberts promptly prepared
and filed a patent application directed to the machine. Which of the following statements is
correct?

(A) Roberts may not obtain a patent on the machine because it was known by others
before Mr. Roberts made technical drawings of the machine.
(B) Roberts may not obtain a patent on the machine because wine made by the
machine had been sold more than a year before Roberts’ application filing date.
(C) Roberts is entitled to a patent because a goal of the patent system is public
disclosure of technical advances, and the machine would not have been disclosed
to the public without Roberts’ efforts.
(D) Roberts may not obtain a patent on the machine because the vineyard owner was
not hiding the machine and therefore the machine was in public use more than a
year before Roberts’ application filing date.
(E) Statements (A), (B), (C) and (D) are each incorrect.
32. 10.01.a.6. In connection with the utility of an invention described in a patent application, which of the following conforms to proper USPTO practice and procedure?

(A) A deficiency under 35 U.S.C. § 101 also creates a deficiency under 35 U.S.C.
§ 112, first paragraph.
(B) To overcome a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, it must be shown that the claimed
device is capable of achieving a useful result on all occasions and under all
conditions.
(C) A claimed invention is properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as lacking utility
if the particular embodiment disclosed in the patent lacks perfection or performs
crudely.
(D) To overcome a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101, it is essential to show that the
claimed invention accomplishes all its intended functions.
(E) A claimed invention lacks utility if it is not commercially successful.
33. 10.01.p.3. Practitioner Smith filed a utility patent application on January 5, 2001, with informal drawings. Upon review of the drawings, the USPTO concluded that the drawings were not in compliance with the 37 CFR 1.84(a)(1) and (k), and were not suitable for reproduction. In an Office communication, Smith was notified of the objection and given two months to correct the drawings so that the application can be forwarded to a Technology Center for examination.
Which of the following complies with USPTO practices and procedures for a complete bona fide
attempt to advance the application to final action?
(A) Smith timely files a response requesting that the objections to the drawings be
held in abeyance until allowable subject matter is indicated.
(B) Smith timely files a response requesting that the objections to the drawings be
held in abeyance since the requirement increases up- front costs for the patent
applicant, and the costs can be avoided if patentable subject matter is not found.
(C) Smith timely files a response requesting that the objections to the drawings be
held in abeyance until fourteen months from the earliest claimed priority date.
(D) Smith timely files a response correcting the drawings to comply with 37
CFR 1.84(a)(1) and (k), and making them suitable for reproduction.
(E) All of the above.
34. 4.02.a.16. Jill, a registered patent agent, receives a Notice of Allowance from the USPTO
with a mail date of November 13, 2001, regarding a utility patent application for an
improved garden hose which she had filed on behalf of one of her small entity clients.
The Notice of Allowance specifies a sum that must be paid within three months of the
mailing date to avoid abandonment. The sum specified includes both the issue fee and
the publication fee. As a result of a small fire in her office building, Jill is unable to
resurrect her files until the last day of the three month period. Jill mails a letter to the
USPTO on February 13, 2002 using the U.S. Postal Service. Jill does not employ the
procedures of 37 CFR 1.8 or 1.10 to mail the letter. The letter is received in the USPTO
on February 15, 2002. The letter correctly identifies the application. The letter
authorizes the USPTO to charge the proper issue fee for a small entity to her deposit
account. The account has been identified in a previously filed authorization to charge
fees. At the time the letter was filed in the USPTO, the account had a balance of
$1000.00 in funds. Nothing in the letter authorized payment of the publication fee, no
petition for an extension of time was filed, and an Office-provided issue fee transmittal
form was not filed. No postal emergency was involved in filing the letter. Which of the
following statements accords with proper USPTO practice and procedure?

(A) The application will become abandoned because Jill did not authorize
payment of the publication fee.
(B) The application will not become abandoned because the authorization to
charge fees operates as a request to charge the correct fees to any deposit
account identified in a previously filed authorization to charge fees.
(C) The application will become abandoned because Jill’s letter did not
include a petition for an extension of time accompanied by the proper fee.
(D) The application will become abandoned because a completed Officeprovided
issue fee transmittal form, PTOL-85B, did not accompany Jill’s
letter.
(E) The application will become abandoned because Jill’s letter was not
timely filed in the USPTO and it was not mailed in accordance with the
provisions of 37 CFR 1.8 or 1.10.
35. 4.02.p.4. Assume that conception of applicant’s complex invention occurred prior to the
date of the reference, but reduction to practice occurred after the date of the reference.
Which of the following is sufficient to overcome the reference in accordance with proper
USPTO practice and procedure?

(A) In a 37 CFR 1.131 affidavit or declaration, it is sufficient to allege that
applicant or patent owner has been diligent.
(B) In a 37 CFR 1.131 affidavit or declaration, it is sufficient to clearly
establish conception of the invention prior to the effective date of the
reference, and diligence from just prior to the effective date of the
reference to actual reduction to practice. The presence of a lapse of time
between the reduction to practice of an invention and the filing of an
application thereon is not relevant.
(C) In a 37 CFR 1.131 affidavit or declaration, it is sufficient to clearly
establish conception of the invention prior to the effective date of the
reference. Diligence need not be considered.
(D) In a 37 CFR 1.131 affidavit or declaration, it is sufficient to show
conception and reduction to practice in any country.
(E) In a 37 CFR 1.131 affidavit or declaration, it is always sufficient to prove
actual reduction to practice for all mechanical inventions by showing plans
for the construction of the claimed apparatus.
36. 10.02.a.2. To satisfy the written description requirement of the first paragraph of 35 USC 112, an applicant must show possession of the invention. An applicant’s lack of possession of the invention may be evidenced by:
(A) Describing an actual reduction to practice of the claimed invention.
(B) Describing the claimed invention with all of its limitations using such descriptive means as words, structures, figures, diagrams, and formulas that fully set forth the claimed invention.
(C) Requiring an essential feature in the original claims, where the feature is not described in the specification or the claims, and is not conventional in the art or known to one of ordinary skill in the art.
(D) Amending a claim to add a limitation that is supported in the specification through implicit or inherent disclosure.
(E) Amending a claim to correct an obvious error by the appropriate correction.
37. 10.02.p.5. In accordance with the MPEP and USPTO rules and procedure, certain individuals owe a duty to the USPTO to disclose all information known to be material to patentability of the claim(s) pending in an application. Which of the following parties does not have the duty?

(A) An inventor named in the application who relies on a patent attorney to prepare and prosecute the application.
(B) A corporation to which an assignment of the entire interest in the application is on record at the USPTO.
(C) An agent who prepares the application.
(D) An attorney who prosecutes the application.
(E) A person, who is not an inventor named in the application, who is substantively involved in the preparation and prosecution of the application, and who is associated with an inventor named in the application.
38. 4.03.a.2. A registered practitioner filed in the USPTO a client’s utility patent application on December 30, 2002. The application was filed with a request for nonpublication, certifying that the invention disclosed in the U.S. application has not and will not be the subject of an application in another country, or under a multilateral international agreement, that requires eighteen month publication. Subsequently, the client files an application in Japan on the invention and some recent improvements to the invention. The improvements are not disclosed or supported in the utility application. Japan is a country that requires eighteen month publication. Two months after filing the application in Japan, and before filing any other papers in the USPTO, the client remembers that a nonpublication request was filed and informs the practitioner about the application that was filed in Japan. Which of the following courses of action is in accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP?

(A) The application is abandoned because the practitioner did not rescind the nonpublication request and provide notice of foreign filing within 45 days of having filed the application in Japan. The applicant must now file a petition and fee to revive under 37 CFR 1.137(b).
(B) The application is abandoned because the applicant did not rescind the nonpublication request before filing the application in Japan. The applicant must now file a petition and fee to revive under 37 CFR 1.137(b).
(C) The applicant should file an amendment to the specification of the U.S. application, adding the recent improvements to the disclosure in the specification.
(D) The application is abandoned because the applicant did not rescind the nonpublication request by notifying the Office under 37 CFR 1.213(c) within the appropriate time. The applicant must now file a petition and fee to revive under 37 CFR 1.137(b).
(E) The applicant could today notify the USPTO of the foreign filing. It is not necessary to file a petition and fee to revive for the application to continue to be examined in the USPTO.
39. 4.03.p.4. The Office mailed an Office action containing a proper final rejection dated July 8, 2002. The Office action did not set a period for reply. On January 7, 2003, in reply to the final rejection, a registered practitioner filed a request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, a request for a suspension of action under 37 CFR 1.103(c) to suspend action for three months, and proper payment all required fees. No submission in reply to the outstanding Office action accompanied the request for continued examination. No other paper was submitted and no communication with the Office was held until after Midnight, January 8, 2003. Which of the following statements accords with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP?

(A) If an appropriate reply is submitted within the three month period of suspension permitted under 37 CFR 1.103(c), the application will not be held abandoned.
(B) The application will not be held abandoned if an appropriate reply is submitted within the three month period of suspension and it is accompanied by a showing that the reply could not have been submitted within the period set in the final rejection. For example, the reply includes a showing based on an experiment that required 8 months to conduct.
(C) No reply will prevent the application from being held abandoned.
(D) If, on January 10, 2003, the primary examiner and applicant agree to an examiner’s amendment that places the application in condition for allowance and a notice of allowance is mailed within the three month period of suspension, application X will not be held abandoned.
(E) No other submission by applicant is necessary because application X is still pending. The examiner is required to act on the request for continued examination after expiration of the three month period of suspension.
40. 10.03.a.4. Claim 1 of an application recites “[a]n article comprising: (a) a copper substrate; and (b) a electrically insulating layer on said substrate.” The specification defines the term “copper” as being elemental copper or copper alloys. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, for purposes of searching and examining the claim, the examiner should interpret the term “copper” in the claim as reading on:
(A) Elemental copper only, based on the plain meaning of “copper.”
(B) Copper alloys only, based on the special definition in the specification.
(C) Elemental copper and copper alloys, based on the special definition in the specification.
(D) Any material that contains copper, including copper compounds.
(E) None of the above.
41. 10.03.p.2. A U.S. patent was granted on May 8, 2001. The sole independent claim in the patent is directed to a combination of elements ABCD. A registered practitioner filed a reissue application on April 11, 2003 to narrow sole independent claim. In the reissue application, the independent claim is amended to a combination to elements ABCDE. The reissue application is accompanied by a transmittal letter stating that the application was filed to narrow a claim, that all inventors could not be located to sign the reissue oath or declaration at that time, and that a declaration would be submitted in due course. No other amendments to the claims were filed on April 11, 2003. On May 8, 2003, a declaration signed by all inventors is filed declaring that they had claimed less than they had a right to claim, and that the error arose without deceptive intent. The inventors also filed on May 8, 2003 a preliminary amendment deleting element A from the sole independent claim leaving elements BCDE. The amendment and declaration are filed using the provisions of 37 CFR 1.10. The practitioner included an authorization to charge the practitioner’s deposit account for any necessary fees. Which of the following actions by the primary the examiner in the first Office action is in accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP?
(A) Reject all the claims based upon a broadening reissue outside the two year statutory period authorized by 35 USC 251 since applicant did not file a broadened reissue claim at the time of filing.
(B) Reject all the claims based upon a broadening reissue outside the two year statutory period authorized by 35 USC 251 since applicant did not file a claim to a broadened reissue claim within the two year period set by 35 USC 251.
(C) Reject all the claims based upon a broadening reissue outside the two year statutory period authorized by 35 USC 251 since applicant’s indication in the transmittal letter indicated that the filing of the reissue application was a narrowing reissue and that the broadening amendment was not permissible even if filed within the two-years from the grant of the original patent.
(D) Determine that the application is a proper broadening reissue and perform an examination and issue an Office action in due course.
(E) Determine that the application is a proper broadening reissue and reject the claims under the recapture doctrine since the claims are broader than the issued claims.
42. 4.02.a.42. Which of the following can never properly be available as prior art for purposes of a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)?
(A) A drawing, labeled “Prior Art,” submitted by the applicant.
(B) Canceled matter in an application that matured into a U.S. patent where the matter is not published in the patent.
(C) An abandoned patent application referenced in a publication available to the public.
(D) The combination of two references, where one of the references is used merely to explain the meaning of a term used in the primary reference.
(E) A reference authored only by applicant, and published less than one year prior to the effective filing date of applicant’s patent application.

43. 4.00.p.41. Which of the following may not be properly used as prior art for purposes of rejecting a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) in an application having an effective filing date of Monday, May 3, 1999?

(A) A journal article, published Saturday, May 2, 1998, disclosing all the claimed
elements and fully teaching how to make and use the invention as claimed.
(B) A foreign patent, published March 3, 1998, which applicant referenced in the
application when claiming foreign priority based on the foreign application date,
and applicant submitted a certified copy of the original foreign application.
(C) Applicant’s statement in a declaration under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132 that although the
invention as claimed had been offered for sale in department stores in New York
during 1997, this was done only to analyze consumer acceptance of the packaging
in which the invention is marketed.
(D) A journal article, published May 1, 1997, disclosing all the elements of the claim
and teaching how to make and use the claimed invention. The examiner used the
article in combination with another journal article in a previous non-final Office
action to reject the same claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
(E) All of the above.
44. 10.01.a.26. Where a reference relied upon in a 35 U.S.C. § 103 rejection qualifies as prior art only under 35 U.S.C. § 102(f), or (g), which of the following represents the most comprehensive answer in accord with proper USPTO practice and procedure as to the action an applicant should take to overcome the rejection?

(A) Present proof that the subject matter relied upon and the claimed invention are
currently commonly owned.
(B) Present proof that the subject matter relied upon and the claimed invention were
commonly owned at the time the later invention was made.
(C) Present proof that the subject matter relied upon and the claimed invention were
subject to an obligation to assign to the same person at the time the later invention
was made.
(D) (A) and (B).
(E) (C) and (D).
45. 4.02.a.44. An amendment filed in January 8, 2002, in an unassigned nonprovisional
application seeks to cancel claims so that fewer than all of the currently named inventors
are the actual inventors of the invention being claimed. The amendment includes a
request to delete the names of the persons who are not inventors. In accordance with
proper USPTO rules and procedure, the request may be signed by which of the
following?
(A) A registered practitioner not of record who acts in a representative
capacity under 37 CFR 1.34(a).
(B) All of the applicants (37 CFR 1.41(b)) for patent.
(C) A registered practitioner of record appointed pursuant to 37 CFR 1.34(b).
(D) (B) and (C).
(E) (A), (B), and (C).
46. 4.02.p.37. Applicant Einstein files a patent application on November 26, 1999, that claims a new type of football pads. Prosecution is conducted and the application issues as a patent to Einstein on April 3, 2001. A competitor, Weisman, who has been making and selling football pads since April of 1998, learns of Einstein’s patent when Einstein approaches him on May 3, 2001, with charges of infringement of the Einstein patent. Weisman makes an appointment to see you to find out what he can do about Einstein’s patent, since Weisman believes that he is the first inventor of the claimed subject matter. At your consultation on May 17, 2001, with Weisman, you discover that Weisman widely distributed printed publications containing a fully enabling disclosure of the invention and all claimed elements in the Einstein patent. Weisman used the printed publication for marketing his football pads in April of 1998. Weisman explains that he wishes to avoid litigation. Which of the following is a proper USTPO practice and procedure that is available to Weisman?
(A) Weisman should file a petition to correct inventorship under 37 CFR 1.324 in the patent, along with a statement by Weisman that such error arose without any deceptive intention on his part, requesting that a certificate of correction be issued for the patent under 35 U.S.C. § 256, naming the correct inventive entity, Weisman.
(B) Weisman should file a reissue application under 35 U.S.C. § 251, requesting correction of inventorship as an error in the patent that arose or occurred without deceptive intention, wherein such error is corrected by adding the inventor Weisman and deleting the inventor Einstein, as well as citing Joe Weisman’s April 1998 printed publication for the football pads as evidence that Weisman is the correct inventor.
(C) Weisman should file a prior art citation under 35 U.S.C. § 301, citing the sales in April 1998 of football pads, and explain the pertinency and manner of applying such sales to at least one claim of the Einstein patent.
(D) Weisman should file a request for ex parte reexamination of the Einstein patent under 35 U.S.C. § 302, citing the April 1998 printed publication of football pads in, and explain the pertinency and manner of applying such prior art to at least one claim of the Einstein patent.
(E) Weisman should file a request for inter partes reexamination of the Einstein patent under 35 U.S.C. § 311, citing public use of the football pads in April 1998, and explain the pertinency and manner of applying such prior use to at least one claim of the Einstein patent.
47. 10.02.a.49. In accordance with the MPEP and USPTO rules and procedure, correspondence transmitted to the USPTO by facsimile is not permitted in certain situations. Which of the following facsimile transmissions to the USPTO will be accorded a date of receipt by the USPTO?

(A) Facsimile transmission of a request for reexamination under 37 CFR 1.510 or 1.913.
(B) Facsimile transmission of drawings submitted under 37 CFR 1.81, 1.83 through 1.85, 1.152, 1.165, 1.174, or 1.437.
(C) Facsimile transmission of a response to a Notice of Incomplete Nonprovisional Application for the purpose of obtaining an application filing date.
(D) Facsimile transmission of a correspondence to be filed in a patent application subject to a secrecy order under 37 CFR 5.1 through 5.5 and directly related to the secrecy order content of the application.
(E) Facsimile transmission of a continued prosecution application under 37 CFR 1.53(d) and an authorization to charge the basic filing fee to a deposit account.
48. 10.02.p.46. Which of the following statements does not accord with proper USPTO practice and procedure?

(A) A protest may be filed by an attorney or other representative on behalf of an unnamed principal.
(B) Information which may be relied on in a protest includes information indicating violation of the duty of disclosure under 37 CFR 1.56.
(C) While a protest must be complete and contain a copy of every document relied on by the protestor, a protest without copies of prior art documents will not necessarily be ignored.
(D) A protest must be submitted prior to the date the application was published or the mailing of a notice of allowance, whichever occurs later, provided the application is pending.
(E) Since a protestor is not authorized to participate in the prosecution of a pending application, the examiner must not communicate in any manner with the protestor.

49. 4.03.a.47. In accordance with USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP, claims in a patent application may not contain:

(A) chemical formulas.
(B) mathematical equations.
(C) drawings or flow diagrams.
(D) only one sentence.
(E) tables not necessary to conform with 35 USC 112.

50. 4.03.p.46. In accordance with USPTO rules and procedures set forth in the MPEP, which of the following is not a “printed publication” under 35 USC 102(b), with respect to a patent application filed June 1, 2002?

(A) A paper that was orally presented at a meeting held May 1, 2001, where the meeting was open to all interested persons and the paper was distributed in written form to six people without restriction.
(B) A doctoral thesis that was indexed, cataloged, and shelved May 1, 2001, in a single, university library.
(C) A research report distributed May 1, 2001, in numerous copies but only internally within an organization and intended to remain confidential.
(D) A reference available only in electronic form on the Internet, which states that it was publicly posted May 1, 2001.
(E) A technical manual that was shelved and cataloged in a public library as of May 1, 2001, where there is no evidence that anyone ever actually looked at the manual.

1.C 26.A
2.B 27.D
3.C 28.D
4.C 29.C
5.D 30.D
6.All Ans Accepted 31.E
7.B 32.A
8.B 33.D
9.B 34.E
10.E 35.B
11.C 36.C
12.D 37.B
13.C 38.A
14.B 39.C
15.B 40.C
16.A 41.D
17.B 42.E
18.A 43.A
19.A 44.B or C
20.C 45.E
21.E 46.D
22.A 47.E
23.E 48.D
24.A 49.C
25.E 50.C

P1. 10.03.a.49. Inventor files an application for a non-theoretical metal alloy. The application as originally filed contains the following Claim 1:

1. A metal alloy comprising at least 20% by volume of iron; at least 10% by volume of gallium, and at least 10% by volume of copper.

In accordance with the patent law, rules and procedures as related by the MPEP, which of the following claims would be properly held indefinite under 35 USC 112(2)?

(A) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing 66% by volume of gallium and 14% by volume of copper.
(B) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing at least 21% by volume of iron, 11% by volume of gallium, and 10.01% by volume of copper.
(C) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing 20% by volume of iron, 10% by volume of gallium, and 10% by volume of copper.
(D) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing 54% by volume of copper and 27% by volume of gallium.
(E) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing at least 1% by volume of silver.

P2. 10.03.p.47. To rely in a rejection under 35 USC 102(a) on an invention that is known or publicly used in accordance with patent laws, rules and procedures as rel

Reply

582 Mambo5No Gravatar January 27, 2012 at 6:45 am

Looks like it only let me post the first practice test. Let me try to post the other 3 one at a time:
2nd test:
P1. 10.03.a.49. Inventor files an application for a non-theoretical metal alloy. The application as originally filed contains the following Claim 1:

1. A metal alloy comprising at least 20% by volume of iron; at least 10% by volume of gallium, and at least 10% by volume of copper.

In accordance with the patent law, rules and procedures as related by the MPEP, which of the following claims would be properly held indefinite under 35 USC 112(2)?

(A) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing 66% by volume of gallium and 14% by volume of copper.
(B) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing at least 21% by volume of iron, 11% by volume of gallium, and 10.01% by volume of copper.
(C) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing 20% by volume of iron, 10% by volume of gallium, and 10% by volume of copper.
(D) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing 54% by volume of copper and 27% by volume of gallium.
(E) Claim 2: The alloy of claim 1 containing at least 1% by volume of silver.

P2. 10.03.p.47. To rely in a rejection under 35 USC 102(a) on an invention that is known or publicly used in accordance with patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, the invention:

(A) must be known or used in NAFTA or WTO member countries.
(B) must be known or used in a NAFTA member country, but only if the filing date of the application is after the effective date of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act.
(C) must be known or used in this country.
(D) can be known or used in any country.
(E) must be known or used in a WTO member country, but only if the filing date of the application is after the effective date of the implementation of the Uruguay Round (WTO) Agreements Act.
The following fact pattern is for the next 2 questions:
Mario Lepieux was a member of a Canadian national hockey team touring Europe. While traveling through Germany (a WTO member country) in December 1998, Mario conceived of an aerodynamic design for a hockey helmet that offered players improved protection while reducing air resistance during skating. Upon Mario’s return to Canada (a NAFTA country), he enlisted his brothers Luigi and Pepe Lepieux to help him market the product under the tradename “Wing Cap.” On February 1, 1999, without Mario’s knowledge or permission, Luigi anonymously published a promotional article written by Mario and fully disclosing how the Wing Cap was made and used. The promotional article was published in Moose Jaw Monthly, a regional Canadian magazine that is not distributed in the United States. The Wing Cap was first reduced to practice on March 17, 1999. A United States patent application properly naming Mario as the sole inventor was filed September 17, 1999. That application has now been rejected as being anticipated by the Moose Jaw Monthly article.
P3. 4.00.a.10. Which of the following statements is most correct?
(A) The promotional article cannot be used as prior art because the Wing Cap had not been reduced to practice at the time the article appeared in the regional Canadian magazine.
(B) The regional Canadian magazine article is not prima facie prior art because it was published without Mario’s knowledge or permission.
(C) The regional Canadian magazine article is not prima facie prior art because it appeared in a regional Canadian publication and does not evidence knowledge or use in the United States.
(D) The promotional article in the regional Canadian magazine constituted an offer to sell that operates as an absolute bar against Mario’s patent application.
(E) Mario, as the inventor, can overcome the rejection by filing an affidavit under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132 establishing that he is the inventor, and the article describes his work.
P4. 4.00.a.11. Which of the following statements is most correct?
(A) In a priority contest against another inventor, Mario can rely on his activities in Canada in establishing a date of invention.
(B) In a priority contest against another inventor, Mario can rely on his activities in Germany in establishing a date of invention.
(C) Mario can rely on his activities in Canada in establishing a date of invention prior to publication of the regional Canadian magazine article.
(D) (A) and (C).
(E) (A), (B), and (C).
P5. 4.00.p.28. Which of the following is true?
(A) On appeal of a rejection of ten claims to the Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences, each appealed claim stands or falls separately as a result of
appellant pointing out differences in what the claims cover.
(B) The 2-month period for filing a petition mentioned in 37 CFR 1.181(f) is
extendable under 37 CFR 1.136(a).
(C) An examiner may enter a new ground of rejection in the examiner’s answer to an
applicant’s appeal brief.
(D) After filing a notice of appeal, an applicant is estopped from further prosecuting
the same claims in a continuation application.
(E) When desiring to claim foreign priority, the oath or declaration in a reissue
application must claim foreign priority even though the priority claim was made
in the original patent.
P6. 10.01.a.11. In which of the following final Office action rejections is the finality of the Office action rejection proper?
(A) The final Office action rejection is in a second Office action and uses newly cited
art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) to reject unamended claims that were objected to but
not rejected in a first Office action.
(B) The final Office action rejection is in a first Office action in a continuation- in-part
application where at least one claim includes subject matter not present in the
parent application.
(C) The final Office action rejection is in a first Office action in a continuing
application, all claims are drawn to the same inve ntion claimed in the parent
application, and the claims would have been properly finally rejected on the
grounds and art of record in the next Office action if they had been entered in the
parent application.
(D) The final Office action rejection is in a first Office action in a substitute
application that contains material that was presented after final rejection in an
earlier application but was denied entry because the issue of new matter was
raised.
(E) None of the above.
P7. 4.02.a.24. Mr. Brick, the inventor, files an application with the USPTO on January 2, 2001 containing a single claim for his invention: a new bouncing ball called “Y”. Brick
receives a first Office action dated June 4, 2001 from the primary examiner handling
Brick’s application. The examiner rejected Brick’s claim only under 35 U.S.C. § 103 on
the grounds that Reference X teaches a bounc ing ball called “Q,” and that although “Y”
and “Q” are not the same, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill to make
changes to the “Q” ball in order to obtain a ball just like Brick’s “Y” ball.
On August 2, 2001, Brick responds by stating that his new “Y” ball bounces
unexpectedly higher than the “Q” ball described in Reference X. Brick includes a
declaration, signed by Mrs. Kane, that includes extensive data comparing the bouncing
results for the “Y” and “Q” balls and showing that the “Y” ball bounces unexpectedly
higher than the “Q” ball. Brick argues that the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 should be
withdrawn because he has proven that, in view of the unexpectedly higher bounce of the
“Y” ball as compared to the “Q” ball, it would not have been obvious to one of ordinary
skill in the art to make changes to the “Q” ball to obtain Brick’s “Y” ball.
On October 2, 2001, Brick receives a final rejection from the examiner. The rejection
states, in its entirety: “The response has been reviewed but has not been found persuasive
as to error in the rejection. The claim is finally rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for the
reasons given in the first Office action.” Brick believes he is entitled to a patent to his
new bouncing ball “Y.” How should Brick proceed?

(A) Brick should give up because the declaration did not persuade the
examiner of the merits of Brick’s invention.
(B) Brick should timely file a Request for Reconsideration asking the
examiner to reconsider the rejection on the basis of the Kane declaration
and, as a precaution against the Request for Reconsideration being
unsuccessful, also timely file a Notice of Appeal.
(C) Brick should respond by submitting a request for reconsideration
presenting an argument that Reference X does no t provide an enabling
disclosure for a new ball with the unexpectedly higher bounce of his “Y”
ball.
(D) Brick should respond by submitting a request for reconsideration
presenting an argument that Reference X does not provide a written
description for a new ball with the unexpectedly higher bounce of his “Y”
ball.
(E) Brick should respond by submitting a request for reconsideration
presenting an argument the declaration data proves that the “Q” ball and
the “Y” are not identical.
P8. 4.02.p.11. While vacationing in Mexico on April 14, 2001, Henrietta invented a camera that operated at high temperature and is waterproof. She carefully documented her invention
and filed a provisional application in the USPTO on April 30, 2001. She conducted tests
in which the camera withstood temperatures of up to 350 degrees Fahrenheit. However,
when the camera was placed in the water leaks were discovered rendering the camera
inoperable. On April 12, 2002, Henrietta conceived of means that she rightfully believed
will fix the leakage issue. Henrietta came to you and asked whether she can file another
application. Henrietta desires to obtain the broadest patent protection available to her.
Which of the following is the best manner in accordance with proper USPTO practice
and procedure for obtaining the patent covering both aspects of her invention?

(A) She can file a nonprovisional application on April 30, 2002 claiming
benefit of the filing date of the provisional application, disclosing the
means for fixing the leak and presenting a claim covering a camera that
operates at high temperatures and a claim covering a camera that is
waterproof, or presenting a claim covering a camera that both operates at
high temperatures and is waterproof.
(B) Henrietta cannot rightfully claim a camera that is waterproof in a
nonprovisional application filed on April 30, 2002, since she tested the
camera and the camera developed leaks.
(C) Henrietta can file another provisional application on April 30, 2002 and
obtain benefit of the filing of the provisional application filed on April 30,
2001.
(D) Henrietta may establish a date of April 14, 2001 for a reduction to practice
of her invention for claims directed to the waterproofing feature.
(E) Henrietta should file a nonprovisional application on April 30, 2002
having claims directed only to a camera that withstands high temperatures
since the camera that she tested developed leaks.
P9. 10.02.a.6. According to USPTO rules and procedure, which of the following can be overcome by an affidavit under 37 CFR 1.131?
(A) A rejection properly based on statutory double patenting.
(B) A rejection properly made under 35 USC 102(d) based on a foreign patent granted in a non-WTO country.
(C) A rejection properly made under 35 USC 102(a) based on a journal article dated one month prior to the effective filing date of the U.S. patent application. Applicant has clearly admitted on the record during the prosecution of the application that subject matter in the journal article relied on by the examiner is prior art.
(D) A rejection properly made under 35 USC 102(b) based on a U.S. patent that issued 18 months before the effective filing date of the application. The patent discloses, but does not claim, the invention.
(E) None of the above.
P10. 10.02.p.8. An application includes independent claims 1 and 2. Which of the following, in a reply to a non-final Office action, provides the proper basis for a rejection under 35 USC 112, first paragraph?

(A) Applicant amends claim 2 of the originally filed application by adding a limitation which was previously written only in claim 1 of the originally filed application, and one of ordinary skill in the art is enabled by the original disclosure to make and use the invention as claimed in amended claim 2.
(B) Applicant amends claim 1 of the originally filed application by adding a limitation that was written in the original disclosure of the application, but the original disclosure does not enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make or use the invention as claimed in amended claim 1.
(C) Applicant amends and broadens claim 2 by removing a limitation which was written in the original disclosure of the application, and one of ordinary skill in the art is enabled by the original disclosure to make and use the invention as claimed in amended claim 2.
(D) Applicant adds new matter to the disclosure, but does not amend the claims of the originally filed application, and one of ordinary skill in the art is enabled by the original disclosure to make and use the invention as described in each of the claims.
(E) None of the above.
P11. 4.03.a.5. In accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP, which of the following may not be filed by facsimile transmission?

(A) A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114 along with a submission.
(B) A continued prosecution application under 37 CFR 1.53(d).
(C) An amendment in reply to a non-final Office action.
(D) The filing of a provisional patent application specification and drawing for the purpose of obtaining an application filing date.
(E) (B) and (D).
P12. 4.03.p.5. Which of the following practices or procedures may be properly employed in accordance with the USPTO rules and the procedures set forth in the MPEP to overcome a rejection properly based on 35 USC 102(a)?

(A) Perfecting a claim to priority under 35 USC 119(a)-(d) based on a foreign application having a foreign priority filing date that antedates the reference.
(B) Filing a declaration under 37 CFR 1.131 showing that the cited prior art antedates the invention.
(C) Filing a declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 showing that the reference invention is by “others.”
(D) Perfecting priority under 35 USC 119(e) or 120 by, in part, amending the declaration of the application to contain a specific reference to a prior application having a filing date prior to the reference.
(E) (A), (B) (C), and (D).

P13. 10.03.a.5. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, which of the following does not constitute prior art upon which a primary examiner could properly rely upon in making an obviousness rejection under 35 USC 103?
(A) A U.S. patent in the applicant’s field of endeavor which was issued two years before the filing date of applicant’s patent application.
(B) A non-patent printed publication in a field unrelated to the applicant’s field of endeavor but relevant to the particular problem with which the inventor-applicant was concerned, which was published the day after the filing date of applicant’s application.
(C) A printed publication published more than 1 year before the filing date of applicant’s patent application, which publication comes from a field outside the applicant’s field of endeavor but concerns the same problem with which the applicant-inventor was concerned.
(D) A printed publication in the applicant’s field of endeavor published 3 years before the filing date of applicant’s patent application.
(E) A U.S. patent which issued more than 1 year before the filing date of applicant’s patent application, which the Office placed in a different class than the applicant’s patent application, but which concerns the same problem with which the applicant-inventor was concerned, and which shows the same structure and function as the applicant’s patent application.
P14. 10.03.p.4. A registered practitioner files an international application submission that includes a description, claims and drawings in the United States Receiving Office (RO/US) on Wednesday, January 8, 2003. The submission did not include the required request, international and search fees, or the designation of a PCT contracting State. The RO/US mails an “Invitation to Correct the Purported International Application,” dated January 10, 2003, to the practitioner indicating that the designation of at least one Contracting State, as required by PCT Article 11(1)(iii)(b), was not included. A one-month period for response is set in the Invitation. On Monday, February 10, 2003, the practitioner submits by facsimile a designation sheet of the Request Form designating every available Contracting State, and authorization to charge all required fees. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, will the application be accorded an international filing date?

(A) Yes. The application will be accorded a filing date of January 8, 2003.
(B) Yes. The application will be accorded an international filing date of February 10, 2003.
(C) No. The application will not be accorded an international filing date because the failure to designate at least one contracting State cannot be cured by a facsimile transmission.
(D) No. The application was given a one-month period for response. The practitioner would have had to have filed the response on Friday, February 7, 2003 in order to have been timely.
(E) None of the above.

P15. 4.00.a.36. A petition to make a patent application special may be filed without fee in which of the following cases?
(A) The petition is supported by applicant’s birth certificate showing applicant’s age is 62.
(B) The petition is supported by applicant’s unverified statement that applicant’s age is 65.
(C) The petition is supported by applicant’s statement that there is an infringing device actually on the market, that a rigid comparison of the alleged infringing device with the claims of the application has been made, and that applicant has made a careful and thorough search of the prior art.
(D) The petition is accompanied by a statement under 37 C.F.R. § 1.102 by applicant explaining the relationship of the invention to safety of research in the field of recombinant DNA research.
(E) The petition is accompanied by applicant’s statement explaining how the invention contributes to the diagnosis, treatment or prevention of HIV/AIDS or cancer.
P16. 10.01.a.24. Able and Baker conceived an improved gas grille for cookouts. Using elements A, B, C,D, E and F found in their backyards, as well as elements G, H, I, J, K, L, M and N purchased at a local hardware store, they successfully constructed and used a gas grille conforming to their concept. The grille includes subcombination of elements K, L and M conceived by Able, and subcombination C, D, F, G and M conceived by Baker. Able and Baker conceived their respective subcombinations separately and at different times. Able and Baker retain you to prepare and file a patent application for them. You are considering whether and what can be claimed in one patent application. Which of the following is true?

(A) For Able and Baker to properly execute an oath or declaration under 37 CFR 1.63
in a patent application claiming not only the grille, but also the two
subcombinations, Able and Baker must be joint inventors of the grille, and each
of the two subcombinations.
(B) A characteristic of U.S. patent law that is generally shared by other countries is
that the applicant for a patent must be the inventor.
(C) If Able and Baker execute an oath or declaration under 37 CFR 1.63 as joint
inventors and file an application claiming the grille (a combination of elements A,
B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M and N), the existence of the claim to the grille is
evidence of their joint inventorship of the individual elements.
(D) Able and Baker may properly execute an oath or declaration under 37 CFR 1.63
as joint inventors and file an application containing claims to the grille (a
combination of elements A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M and N), claims to
the subcombination conceived by Able, and claims to the subcombination
conceived by Baker.
(E) Able and Baker could not properly claim the combination unless they successfully
and personally reduced the grille to practice.
P17. 10.00.p.50. Which of the following is not a USPTO recommendation or requirement?
(A) Claims should be arranged in order of scope so that the first claim presented is the least restrictive.
(B) Product and process claims should be separately grouped.
(C) Every application should contain no more than three dependent claims.
(D) A claim which depends from a dependent claim should not be separated from that dependent claim by any claim which does not also depend from the dependent claim.
(E) Each claim should start with a capital letter and end with a period.
P18. 4.02.p.24. In 1995 Patent Agent filed a U.S. patent application containing five claims
(Application 1). All five claims are fully supported under 35 U.S.C. § 112 by the
disclosure of Application 1. In 2000, Patent Agent filed a U.S. patent application
(Application 2) that was a continuation- in-part of Application 1. Application 2 adds new
subject matter to the disclosure of Application 1, and ten additional claims. Of the fifteen
claims in Application 2, claims 1-5 are exactly the same as Application 1, claims 6-10 are
fully supported under 35 U.S.C. § 112 by the disclosure of Application 1, and claims 11-
15 are fully supported under 35 U.S.C. § 112 only by the newly added subject matter of
Application 2. The effective filing date for claims in Application 2 is:

(A) 1-15 is 2000.
(B) 1-15 is 1995.
(C) 1-10 is 1995.
(D) 11-15 is 2000.
(E) (C) and (D).
P19. 10.02.a.46. Which of the following statements relevant to a third party submission in a published patent application accords with proper USPTO practice and procedure?

(A) A submission of patents by a member of the public must be made within 2 months of the date of publication of the application.
(B) A submission of patents by a member of the public must be made prior to the mailing of a Notice of Allowance.
(C) A submission of patents by a member of the public must be made within 2 months of the date of publication of the application or prior to the mailing of a Notice of Allowance, whichever is later.
(D) A submission of patents by a member of the public must be made within 2 months of the date of publication of the application or prior to the mailing of a Notice of Allowance, whichever is earlier.
(E) Any submission not filed within the period set forth in the patent rules will be accepted provided it is accompanied by the processing fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(i).
P20. 10.02.p.43. A patent application filed in the USPTO claims a nylon rope coated with element E for the purpose of preventing breakage of the rope. In the firs