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).
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.
3. An applicant submits a product-by-process claim to a shoe made by a series of specific
process steps. The claim is rejected over a publication under 35 USC 102(b) and 103. Assume
for this question that the publication reasonably appears to show the identical shoe, but describes
a different method of making the shoe. What is the proper procedure to try to overcome the
rejection in accordance with the patent laws, rules and the procedures as related in the MPEP?
(A) Argue that all limitations in the claim must be given weight and that rejection
must be withdrawn because the reference does not disclose the claimed method of
(B) Argue that the examiner has not carried the burden of proving that the shoes are
(C) Present evidence why the steps of the claimed process produce a patentably
(D) Submit a declaration under 37 CFR 1.132 by the author of the publication
describing in more detail how the shoe in the publication was made by a different
(E) Argue that the inventor was not aware of the publication when the invention was
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,
(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
(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.