QiYao-Wang/IPEval huggingface dataset:
Question: Today, April 12, 2000, is the last day of a three month shortened statutory period for reply to a non-final rejection over references under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Today, your client, located overseas, requests in a facsimile that you cancel all of the current claims in the application, and advises that a new set of claims to replace the current claims will be sent to you no later than April 29, 2000. There is no deposit account. The client pays all fees in a timely manner. In accordance with proper PTO practice and procedure, which of the following is the most appropriate course of action to take regarding the non-final rejection?
A. Await receipt of the new claims and necessary fees, and then file the amendment, request for reconsideration, and appropriate fee for an extension of time, no more than six months from the date of the non-final rejection.
B. File a request for a one month extension of time today and pay the fee when you file the amendment.
C. File an amendment today canceling all claims in accordance with your client's instructions.
D. File a request for reconsideration today, stating only that "[t]he rejection is in error because the claims define a patentable invention."
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following statements correctly describes current PTO practice and procedure?
A. A joint application by inventors Sam and Will, and a joint application by Will and Sam are different inventive entities.
B. A joint application by inventors Sam and Will, and a sole application by Sam are different inventive entities.
C. Where a patent is granted to Will, and later Will and Sam file a joint application, the presence of Will, a common inventor in the patent, prevents a determination that the patent entity is to "another" within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 102(e).
D. The fact that an application has named a different inventive entity (Sam and Will) than a patent reference (Will) makes the patent prior art, even where one of the inventors is common to both.
(category: patent，Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A U.S. patent issued to Smith on January 6, 1998. Realizing that the claims of the issued patent were too narrow, Smith properly filed a broadening reissue application on September 30, 1999. On March 15, 2000, while preparing a reply to an Office action in the reissue application, Smith recognized that additional claims should be added to provide the desired range of patent protection. On March 17, 2000, Smith submitted an Amendment that, inter alia, added new claims 20-33 to the reissue application. Each of claims 20-22 was broader than the claims originally submitted on September 30, 1999, with the application for a broadened reissue. Each of claims 23-28 was narrower than the claims originally submitted on September 30, 1999, but broader than the original patent claims. Each of claims 29-33 was narrower than the original patent claims. The reissue oath originally filed with the reissue application is adequate to support the newly submitted claims.  Which of the following bests describes a proper action by the examiner in reply to the Amendment?
A. Each of claims 20-33 is rejected as being improper since the claims were added after the two-year anniversary of the original patent issuance.
B. Each of claims 20-33 is examined on the merits, but are not rejected for improperly broadening the reissue application after the two-year anniversary of the original patent issue.
C. Claims 20-28 are rejected as being improper because they were added after the two-year anniversary of the original patent issue, but claims 29-33 are examined on the merits.
D. Claims 20-22 are rejected as being improper because they were added after the two-year anniversary of the original patent issue, but claims 23-33 are examined on the merits.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: In which of the following situations is the Commissioner authorized to refund a fee?
A. After receiving a final rejection, a notice of appeal and appeal fee are filed. After the notice of appeal and correct appeal fee are filed, the examiner thereafter withdraws the final rejection.
B. Upon a showing of an extraordinary situation, when justice requires refund of a fee paid to the PTO where a practitioner paid the correct fee for an extension of time to provide the client with time to given instructions, and the client thereafter informs the practitioner that the client would not pay the fee and authorizes the practitioner to permit the application to become abandoned.
C. Upon a showing that the application, which had been filed in the PTO and for which the correct filing fee had been paid, has been withdrawn from examination and expressly abandoned.
D. Upon a petition to the Commissioner to exercise his supervision to refund a fee, though paid in the correct amount, when the practitioner no longer desired copies of patents ordered.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: 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.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Assuming that each of the following claims is in a different utility patent application, and each claim is fully supported by the disclosure in preceding claims or in the application wherein the claim appears, which of the claims properly presents a process claim?
A. A process of utilizing a filter having electrical components, said process comprising placing a plurality of electrodes on the human body, receiving electrical signals from the electrodes and passing the signals through said filter.
B. A process of polymerizing an organic compound comprising combining a catalyst, organic compound reactants, and solvent in a reaction vessel, heating the combination in the vessel to a high temperature to start the reaction, separating the organic layer from the remaining materials, and evaporating the solvent.
C. The use of a water repellant paint as a sealant for wooden patio furniture.
D. (A), (B) and (C).
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following is not prohibited conduct for a practitioner under the PTO Code of Professional Responsibility?
A. The practitioner entering into a business partnership with an individual who is neither an attorney nor a registered practitioner, where the activities of the partnership consist of the practice of patent law before the Office by the practitioner, and the individual will market the practitioner's services and the client's inventions.
B. Filing an amendment wherein claims are presented that have been copied from an issued patent of another, and knowingly withholding from the Office information identifying the patent from which the claims have been copied.
C. Telling a client that the client's application will go abandoned if the client's bill is not paid and refusing to file any papers in the PTO unless and until the fee is paid.
D. Upon being discharged by a client, filing a request to withdraw wherein the client's intent to discharge is set forth as the reason for the request.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: 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.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: You obtained a patent for inventor Jones. The patent, although disclosing a use for her invention, and the best mode contemplated by Jones at the time the application was filed for making and using her invention, through error and without deceptive intent, failed to describe an embodiment of her invention. The embodiment has become a commercial success. Eighteen months after the patent issued, you filed a reissue application adding a claim and new, necessary supporting disclosure directed to the omitted embodiment, together with Jones' declaration explaining the error, and other required papers In accordance with proper PTO practice and procedure:
A. The claim is subject to a new matter rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 132.
B. The specification is subject to rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for failure to disclose the best mode for achieving commercial success.
C. The claim is subject to a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 251 and a rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph.
D. The claim is allowable.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Assume that a corporation employing more than 500 persons does not qualify as a small business entity.  Which of the following qualifies for reduction of certain patent fees by claiming small entity status in an application?
A. An independent inventor, who intends to make a profit through producing goods made according to the invention disclosed in the application, who has not assigned, granted, conveyed, or licensed any rights in the invention disclosed in the application, and is under no obligation to assign, grant, convey, or license any rights in the invention disclosed in the application.
B. A corporation, assigned all rights in the invention disclosed in the application, having 600 employees, which derives a profit from producing and selling energy-saving devices.
C. An eighty-five year-old inventor who has assigned to a corporation, having 600 employees, all rights in the invention disclosed in the application. The corporation derives a profit from producing and selling energy-saving devices.
D. A patent examiner who works in a group which examines applications which are funded solely by Federal agencies.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following actions, if any, when taken as an initial step to dispute the propriety of the finality of an Office action, comports with proper PTO rules and procedure? 
I: Filing a request for reconsideration concerning the finality of the Office action, while the application is still pending before the primary examiner. 
II: Filing a Notice of Appeal, then a brief, and arguing in the brief the impropriety of the finality of the rejection. 
III: Filing a petition under 37 C.F.R. 1.181 based on improper finality of the rejection to stay the running of the period for reply set in the final Office action.
A. I. only.
B. II. only.
C. III. only.
D. I. and III.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following statements regarding 35 U.S.C. § 103 is most correct?
A. PTO classification of prior art references used to reject a claim under 35 U.S.C. § 103, and the similarities and differences in structure and function carry equal weight as evidence of whether the references are analogous or non-analogous.
B. The question of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is resolved by determining whether the differences between the prior art and the claims would have been obvious.
C. Obviousness of an invention can be properly determined by identifying the \"gist\" of the invention, even where the \"gist\" does not take into regard an express limitation in the claims.
D. In delineating the invention, consideration is given not only to the subject matter recited in the claim, but also the properties of the subject matter which are inherent in the subject matter and disclosed in the specification.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A parent application A was filed on September 9, 1988, and became abandoned on October 19, 1993. Application B was filed on October 21, 1993, and referred to application A as well as claimed the benefit of the filing date of application A. Application B issued as a patent on June 17, 1997. Application C was filed on October 29, 1993, and referred to application B as well as claimed the benefit of the filing date of application B. Application D was filed on December 20, 1996. Application D referred to application B and claimed the benefit of the filing date of application B. Both applications C and D were abandoned for failure to file a timely reply to Office actions that were mailed on April 20, 1999. Application E was filed on July 22, 1999 and is drawn to the same invention as claimed in applications C and D. Application E claims the benefit of the filing dates of applications A, B, C, and D, and makes reference to all preceding applications The earliest effective filing date of application E with respect to any common subject matter in the prior applications is:
A. October 21, 1993.
B. December 20, 1996.
C. October 29, 1993.
D. September 9, 1988.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following is true?
A. Reissue applications may be filed to correct errors made without deceptive intent provided that an application is filed within two years from issuance.
B. An interference may be declared between three parties who invent their inventions in three different countries and each party may be declared the winner for some of the counts at issue.
C. An assignment may not be made conditional on the performance of the payment of money since the public has no way of knowing whether or not payment is made.
D. A patent may not be issued to an assignee and if the inventor dies before the patent issues, the rights to the invention are forfeited.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following is not required in order for a foreign application that has matured into a foreign patent will qualify as a reference under 35 U.S.C. § 102(d)?
A. The foreign application must be filed more than 12 months before the effective filing date of the United States application.
B. The foreign and United States applications must be filed by the same applicant, his or her legal representatives or assigns.
C. 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.
D. 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.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following is not a proper incorporation by reference in an application prior to allowance according to USPTO rules and procedures?
A. Incorporating material necessary to describe the best mode of the claimed invention by reference to a commonly owned, abandoned U.S. application that is less than 20 years old.
B. Incorporating non-essential material by reference to a prior filed, commonly owned pending U.S. application.
C. Incorporating material that is necessary to provide an enabling disclosure of the claimed invention by reference to a U.S. patent.
D. Incorporating non-essential material by reference to a hyperlink.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: In January 1997, Chris invents an electrical door stop for automatically stopping a door at any position by simply pressing the doorknob downward. The doorknob is such that when carrying a large package, one may rest the package on the doorknob to stop the motion of the door. During a lunch break before completing the writing of the application for the patent on the automatic door stop, Chris' patent agent, Sam, visits a local Shack restaurant and notices a door stop which is actuated by stepping with one's foot on a mechanical lever located at the bottom of the door. Sam makes a mental note to ask a colleague as to whether he needs to disclose the doorstop at the Shack restaurant to the USPTO in conjunction with Chris' application in an information disclosure statement, but ultimately neglects to do so. Sam knows that the restaurant (and doorstop) was in existence at least one year prior to Sam's visit. In the first Office action, the only prior art uncovered by the examiner relates to stopping a door using a lever that engages a channel in the ceiling upon being pressed upward. The examiner rejects the claim asserting it would have been obvious to have either upward or downward actuating motion. In the reply to the first Office action Sam argues that the downward motion is essential because it affords the ability to actuate when one is carrying a package and that the prior art does not disclose a downwardly actuated doorstop. Following Sam's argument, the case issues. Claim 1 reads as follows: 1. A door stop for automatically stopping the pivoting action of a door by pressing downward, said door stop comprising: a) first means attached to a door for receiving a downward movement; b) second means for actuating a mechanism for engaging the floor surface in response to the downward movement of the first means, said first and second means being operatively connected. Which of the following is true?
A. Since Sam knew of the doorstop at the restaurant and not Chris, there is no duty to disclose the Shack restaurant doorstop. An attorney need not disclose that which is within his personal knowledge in an information disclosure statement.
B. Since Sam discovered the Shack restaurant device after he had started writing the application, the invention was fully disclosed to Sam. There is no need to disclose that which occurs after an inventor completes his application disclosure.
C. Sam needs to disclose only patents or printed publications to the USPTO to satisfy the duty of disclosure. Since Sam was unaware of any patent or printed publication for the Shack restaurant doorstop, Sam does not need to file an information disclosure in this regard.
D. Chris should file a request for reexamination seeking to have the Shack restaurant door stop considered.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following is a proper basis for establishing a substantial new question of patentability to obtain reexamination in accordance with proper USPTO practice and procedure?
A. An admission per se by the patent owner of record that the claimed invention was on sale, or in public use more than one year before any patent application was filed in the USPTO.
B. A prior art patent that is solely used as evidence of an alleged prior public use.
C. A prior art patent that is solely used as evidence of an alleged insufficiency of disclosure.
D. A printed publication that is solely used as evidence of an alleged prior offer for sale.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: You filed a patent application for a client containing a claim to a composition consisting of X, water and plaster. In the claim X is defined as follows: "X is a member selected from the group consisting of elements A, B, and C." The claim is properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as being anticipated by a reference describing the composition made of A, water and plaster. The rejection may be properly overcome by:
A. Amending the claim by canceling elements B and C because the reference is concerned only with element A.
B. Arguing that the reference is not relevant because it lacks elements B and C.
C. Amending the claim by canceling element A from the Markush group.
D. Amending the claim by changing "consisting of" to "consisting essentially of."
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following is true?
A. Once an application is ready to be issued, there is a public policy that the patent will issue in regular course once the issue fee is timely paid. In accordance with the foregoing, issuance of a patent may not be deferred.
B. The time period set for the payment of the issue fee is statutory and cannot be extended.
C. While anyone may file a request for ex parte reexamination, a patent practitioner filing a request for ex parte reexamination must disclose the client's name.
D. It is necessary to claim priority under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to earlier filed applications for which a corresponding claim of priority has been made in the corresponding foreign filed applications of the same applicant.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: In early 1998, at the request of MC Motors, Eve demonstrated her reverse automobile heating system at a testing facility in Germany. MC Motors signs a confidentiality agreement and agrees not to disclose the invention to anyone. The test is conducted in a secluded area and the persons involved are sworn to secrecy. Unbeknownst to Eve, MC Motors installs the reverse heating system on its MC cars and begins selling its cars with the reverse heating system in the United States in September 1998. In August 1999, MC files a patent application in the United States for the reverse automobile heating system. In December 1999, Eve files a patent application claiming the automobile heating system. The examiner rejects all the claims in Eve's application based upon an MC Motors brochure advertising its cars in September 1998. Which of the following is true?
A. Since the MC Motors misappropriated the invention and since Eve did not authorize the sale, the rejection may be overcome by showing that the sales by MC Motors were not authorized by Eve.
B. Eve is not entitled to a patent since the invention was on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States.
C. MC Motors is entitled to a patent since although it misappropriated the idea for the invention from Eve, the misappropriation was beyond the jurisdiction of the USPTO.
D. (B) and (C).
(category: trade secret, Chinese translation: 商业秘密)