Q) Affidavits (10.01.46p)

September 4, 2008

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 […]

6 comments Read the full post →

Q) Smith's Drawings (10.01.3p)

September 4, 2008

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 […]

3 comments Read the full post →

Q) A, B, C and D (10.01.1p)

September 4, 2008

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 […]

Read the full post →

Q) Obviousness (10.01.30a)

September 4, 2008

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 […]

6 comments Read the full post →

Q) 35 USC 103, 102(f) and 102(g) (10.01.26a)

September 4, 2008

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) […]

10 comments Read the full post →

Q) Able and Baker (10.01.24a)

September 4, 2008

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. […]

3 comments Read the full post →

← Previous Entries

Next Entries →