QiYao-Wang/IPEval huggingface dataset:
Question: On August 23, 1999, you file a patent application in the PTO. Along with the application, you file an unexecuted declaration that refers to the application and a preliminary amendment that describes the best mode of carrying out the claimed invention. Subsequently, you file a signed declaration in reply to a Notice to File Missing Parts. The best mode is described only in the preliminary amendment. In the first Office action, the examiner objects to the preliminary amendment as adding new matter to the specification and requires cancellation of the new matter. Considering the following responses and the additional facts separately, the best way to respond to and overcome the objection, and obtain a patent is to:
A. file a reply pointing out that the objection is improper because the declaration filed in reply to the Notice to File Missing Parts is a properly executed declaration that refers only to the amendment.
B. file a reply pointing out that the objection is improper because the declaration filed in reply to the Notice to File Missing Parts is a properly executed declaration that refers only to the application and amendment.
C. file a reply pointing out that the objection is improper because the declaration filed in reply to the Notice to File Missing Parts is a properly executed supplemental declaration that refers only to the amendment.
D. file an appeal to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interference requesting review of the examiner's objection to the amendment as adding new matter.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: During a reexamination proceeding, you submit the following amendment less than two years from the date that a patent was granted with the claim: 1. (once amended) An application specific integrated circuit for calculating a correlation coefficient, comprising: a multiplication unit [having a plurality of sixty-four bit shift registers]; an integration unit coupled to said multiplication unit; and a digital filter unit coupled to said integration unit and to said multiplication unit. The original disclosure in the patent application stated that a plurality of thirty-two bit shift registers could be used to form the multiplication unit. In accordance with PTO rules and procedure, which, if any, of the following statements, including any reasons given in support thereof, concerning the amendment is true?
A. The form of the amendment is improper, since underlining and brackets are not proper in proceedings where only issues concerning substantial new questions of patentability may be raised.
B. The claim as amended should be allowed if it overcomes the art of record in the application since the amendment was made less than two years from the date that a patent was granted.
C. The claim as amended should be allowed if it overcomes the art of record in the application since the amendment, although broader in some respects than the claim of the patent, is narrower in other respects.
D. The claim as amended should not be allowed since it broadens the scope of the claim of the patent.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: If a claim has been properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as being rendered prima facie obvious over a combination of prior art references, then the rejection can be rebutted in accordance with proper PTO practice and procedure by:
A. showing the criticality of the claimed range where the range in the claim overlaps the range disclosed in one or both prior art references.
B. arguing that the client has recognized latent properties in the prior art which were not recognized by the prior art references.
C. arguing that a combination would not be made by a businessman for economic reasons.
D. contending that each of the prior art references, taken individually, does not teach or render obvious the claimed invention.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Morris, a registered practitioner with a solo practice he operates out of his house, obtained a plant patent for a client on a commercial catnip hybrid. One morning, over four years later, as he was sorting through his cat's toys, he came across a letter from his client indicating the client's belief that a maintenance fee was due four years after issuance. By the time Morris found the letter, it was eight months after the four year anniversary of the plant patent's issuance. Morris should immediately:
A. Tender the maintenance fee and submit a petition (with the required fee) for acceptance of payment where the delay was unintentional.
B. Pay the maintenance fee plus the surcharge for filing a maintenance fee during the grace period.
C. Write the client that no maintenance fee is in fact owed, and apologize for the delay in responding to the client.
D. Do nothing because the patent is irrevocably lost due to failure to pay the maintenance fee within the grace period.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Following proper PTO practices and procedures, which of the following reference(s) anticipates Claim 1:1. A composition consisting of: 60-80% cellulose; 16-18% nylon; up to 0.5% fiber; and at least 6% cotton; said composition being capable of absorbing water in the amount of not more than 45% by weight of the composition.
A. A reference disclosing a sponge having 69% cellulose, 16% nylon, 0.4% fiber, 7% cotton, and 7.6% silk.
B. A reference disclosing a sponge having 78% cellulose, 17% nylon, 0.2% fiber, 4.8% cotton, and a water content of 30% by weight.
C. A reference disclosing a sponge having 76% cellulose, 16% nylon, 8% cotton and containing no water.
D. A reference disclosing a sponge having 61% cellulose, 18% nylon, 0.6% fiber, 20.4% cotton, and a water content of 45% by weight.
(category: patent，Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A patent application includes the following partial Claim 1:Claim 1. A shaving implement comprising (i) _______________________________ (ii) a shaving head including a razor, said shaving head being connected to said handle at said first end; (iii) a collapsible tube of shaving cream positioned in and substantially filling said chamber, said tube including a neck having a dispensing opening; (iv) a tube squeezing slide positioned within said channel and said chamber, said slide including opposed slots thereon, said slots being in sliding engagement with said longitudinal sides of said channel; and (v) a tube closure connected to said neck of said collapsible tube. Which of the following, if included as paragraph (i) of Claim 1, best completes the claim while giving the client the broadest protection?
A. a substantially rigid handle including a chamber and a channel formed in said handle, said channel being defined by longitudinal sides within said handle;
B. a substantially rigid handle having a first end, said handle including a chamber and a channel formed in said handle, said channel being defined by longitudinal sides within said handle;
C. a substantially rigid handle having a first end, said handle including a chamber and an elongated channel formed in said handle;
D. a substantially rigid handle having a first end, said handle including a chamber and a channel formed in said handle;
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following must be included in a petition for a retroactive license to file a patent application in a foreign country?
A. A verified statement containing an averment that the subject matter in question was not under a secrecy order at the time it was filed abroad, and that it is not currently under a secrecy order.
B. A verified explanation of why the material was filed abroad through error and without deceptive intent without the required license first having been obtained.
C. A listing of each of the foreign countries in which the unlicensed patent application was filed.
D. (A) and (B).
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Applicant filed a patent application claiming a polyol. The application discloses that the claimed polyol is used to form rigid polyurethane foam having a structural formula. The examiner properly rejected the claimed polyol as unpatentable over prior art disclosing the claimed polyol and its use to form rigid polyurethane foam having the same structural formula. Given the fact that applicant's specification discloses that the polyol may be produced by a process comprising steps A, B, C, and D, and the process is novel and unobvious, which of the following claims, if introduced by amendment, would overcome the rejection?
A. A polyol having the property of forming rigid polyurethane foam having structural formula Z, the polyol being produced by the process comprising the steps A, B, C, and D.
B. A polyol produced by the process comprising the steps A, B, C, and D, said polyol having the property of forming rigid polyurethane foam having structural formula Z.
C. A polyol produced by the process comprising the steps A, B, C, and D.
D. A polyol comprising the resultant product of steps A, B, C, and D.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: In the course of prosecuting a patent application before the PTO, you receive a non-final Office action allowing Claim 1, and rejecting Claims 2 through 6, the remaining claims in the case. Claim 1 reads as follows:1. A ship propeller exhibiting excellent corrosion resistance, said ship propeller consisting essentially of a copper base alloy consisting of 2 to 10 percent tin, 0.1 to 0.9 percent zinc, and copper. The specification of the application teaches that the copper base alloy made with the addition of 2 to 10 percent aluminum increases the alloy's wear resistance without detracting from its corrosion resistance. However, adding aluminum to the surface of the propeller does not increase wear resistance. Which of the following claims, if any, if added by amendment would accord with proper PTO practice and procedure?
A. 7. A copper base alloy according to Claim 1 wherein said alloy includes 2 to 10 percent aluminum.
B. 7. A ship propeller according to Claim 1 including the step of adding 2 to 10 percent aluminum to the copper base alloy.
C. 7. A ship propeller according to Claim 1 including 2 to 10 percent aluminum.
D. 7. A ship propeller according to Claim 1 wherein said alloy includes 2 to 10 percent aluminum.
(category: patent，Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A claim limitation reads "a pH range between 7 and 12, preferably between 9 and 10." Which of the following is correct?
A. Since the limitation properly sets forth outer limits, it is definite.
B. As long as the limitation is supported in the written description, it is proper.
C. The limitation is indefinite.
D. Since the limitation sets forth a preferred range, it is definite.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Patent practitioner Wally is hired to prepare a patent application directed to a method of making a particular composition. After consulting with his client, Wally believes that schematic drawings would be helpful, and that color drawings would be most helpful in disclosing the method. Wally diligently contacts a draftsperson to prepare the color drawings and proceeds to complete his draft patent application. The application contains only method claims. Upon completing the application, Wally forwards the draft application to his client for review. The application contains method claims, and does not include any reference to drawing figures. Before the color drawings are complete, Wally receives an urgent call from his client directing Wally to file the application by the close of business that day due to an unforeseen statutory bar date. Drawings are not required to understand the claimed method. A patent would be barred if the application is filed the following day. Which of the following combination of acts presents the minimum course of action to be taken by Wally in order to obtain a filing date that avoids the statutory bar?
A. File the application, oath and filing fee by the close of business without the drawings.
B. File the application by the close of business without the oath, filing fee or drawings.
C. File the application and filing fee without the drawings and later file a petition for accepting the color drawings along with the petition fee; three (3) sets of color drawings; and a proposed amendment to insert the following in the specification: "The file of this patent contains at least one drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent with color drawing(s) will be provided by the Patent and Trademark Office upon request and payment of the necessary fee."
D. File the application without the drawings by the close of business; file a preliminary amendment the next day that amends the specification to refer to drawing figures and which includes a set of black and white drawings.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: You received an Office action dated March 17, 1999, rejecting the claims of a pending patent application filed April 22, 1998. You prepared a timely reply that would overcome the examiner's rejections and place the application in condition for allowance. You put the reply in a correctly addressed envelope, with a metered mail stamp having a date of June 4, 1999. Your procedure is to give all outgoing mail to your staff assistant who keeps it locked in his desk drawer until he can mail it at the end of his work day. The reply fell inside the desk, behind the drawer, and was never mailed. Today, November 3, 1999, you receive a Notice of Abandonment of the patent application for which the reply was prepared. You searched and found the unopened and unmailed envelope. You know that the applicant, your mother, sold five items covered by all the claims of the now abandoned application over a year ago (but not before the original application was filed) and that her commercial survival depends on obtaining the claims in the abandoned application. A valid patent, including the claims in the abandoned application, can be obtained for your mother, if:
A. you submit a new reply to the patent examiner arguing the commercial success of the item as shown by the sales of the five items sold over a year ago with affidavits under 37 CFR § 1.132 traversing the holding of abandonment.
B. you mail the reply today in its original, sealed envelope which takes precedence over the Notice of Abandonment since the date stamped on the envelope is both before the due date for reply and before the Notice of Abandonment.
C. the applicant files a petition to revive an unintentionally abandoned application stating that the entire delay in filing the required reply was unintentional, files the reply that was prepared by you in June 1999, and submits the appropriate petition fee.
D. you provide the unopened envelope as evidence of the staff assistant's negligence and petition the Group Director to reopen prosecution of the application on the merits.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A practitioner should consider whether information presented during prosecution of an application may be used by the examiner as evidence against the applicant. What evidence may an examiner not use to demonstrate that a claim fails to correspond in scope with that which an applicant regards as his or her invention?
A. Arguments, containing admissions, advanced in a reply filed by the practitioner representing the applicant.
B. Admissions contained in a brief.
C. The lack of agreement between the claims and the specification.
D. Affidavits, containing admissions, filed under 37 CFR § 1.132.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: Which of the following statements regarding a reissue patent application is true?
A. Only one reissue patent application is permitted to be issued for distinct and separate parts of the thing patented.
B. New matter may be properly added in a reissue application to correct an error made during the prosecution of the original patent application.
C. A reissue will not be granted to "recapture" claimed subject matter deliberately canceled in an application to obtain a patent.
D. To retain the benefit of priority under 35 U.S.C. § 119, it is not necessary to make a new claim for priority in the reissue patent application if a claim for priority was perfected in the application on which the original patent was made.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: You filed a patent application for Sam, who invented an apparatus for labeling and identifying baseballs. In the application, the apparatus is described as including means for marking baseballs; an ultraviolet light source; and a computer coupled to both the means for marking baseballs and the ultraviolet light source. The only means for marking baseballs set forth in the application was a commercially available invisible ink stamper, also known as a marker. The specification described the invention as being useful for identifying home run baseballs. The application was filed with one claim, which stated: Claim 1. An apparatus, comprising: an invisible ink stamper; an ultraviolet light source; and a computer coupled to said invisible ink stamper and to said ultraviolet light source. Claim 1 was properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102(b) as being anticipated by a patent issued to McGoo, which disclosed an apparatus having only an invisible ink stamper, an ultraviolet light source, and a computer coupled to the invisible ink stamper and to the ultraviolet light source. The McGoo patent did not mention identifying baseballs, but described the invention as useful for labeling and identifying baseball bats. Which of the following amendments, if any, avoids anticipation of Claim 1 by the McGoo patent?
A. 1. (amended once) An apparatus intended to be used to identify home run baseballs, comprising: an invisible ink stamper; an ultraviolet light source; and a computer coupled to said invisible ink stamper and to said ultraviolet light source.
B. 1. (amended once) An apparatus, [comprising] consisting of: an invisible ink stamper, an ultraviolet light source, and a computer coupled to said invisible ink stamper and to said ultraviolet light source.
C. 1. (amended once) An apparatus, comprising: [an invisible ink stamper] a marker; an ultraviolet light source, and a computer coupled to said means for marking baseballs and to said ultraviolet light source.
D. (B) and (C).
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A patent application includes the following Claim 1:
A. Claim 2. The method of claim 1, wherein said first temperature is in the range of 1875掳C to 1925掳C, and preferably between 1895掳C and 1905掳C.
B. Claim 3. The electrical device of claim 1, wherein said first gas further comprises an inert gas such as Argon.
C. Claim 4. The method of claim 1, wherein said second gas further consists of Argon.
D. Claim 5. The method of claim 1, wherein said first gas further comprises an inert gas such as Argon.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: An original claim in a patent application to a mechanical arts invention recites the limitation of "a clip," which is shown in an original application drawing as being one of several elements of the invention. The "clip" is well known in the mechanical arts. However, "a clip" does not appear in the original written description part of the application. Which of the following is correct?
A. The written description may not be properly amended to include "a clip".
B. The claim is indefinite with respect to "a clip."
C. The application lacks an enabling disclosure as to "a clip."
D. The claim is definite with respect to "a clip."
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: A nonprovisional patent application has been filed for inventor Alton disclosing and claiming an alumino-silicate catalyst for oxidizing organic compounds. Which of the following statements, considered separately, about the best mode contemplated by Alton for the aluminosilicate catalyst is not true?
A. The best mode must be designated as the best mode in the application if the application contains several embodiments, one of which is the best mode.
B. The presence of one specific example in the specification is evidence that the best mode has been disclosed.
C. The best mode need not be updated if, between the time of filing the nonprovisional patent application and a continuation application, Alton discovered a better catalyst than the best mode disclosed in the non-provisional application.
D. A failure to disclose the best mode in the application as filed cannot be cured by first introducing into the application by amendment a specific mode of practicing the invention.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: You are drafting a patent application disclosing and describing a door assembly wherein a door, a door frame, and a pair of hinges are separate elements which must be included in a claim to the assembled combination of a door secured to a door frame by a pair of hinges. The application discloses that it is essential to the invention that the door is secured to the doorframe in the described manner to permit the door to be readily opened and closed. The application further discloses that it is also essential to the invention for the assembly, in a closed relationship, to keep out exterior elements, while providing privacy and permitting quick egress in an emergency. Which of the following claims properly sets forth the combination?
A. An assembly having a door capable of being hingedly connected to a doorframe.
B. An assembly having a door and means for securing the door.
C. An assembly having a door and a pair of hinges for securing the door.
D. An assembly having a door, and a doorframe, said door being secured to said doorframe with a pair of hinges.
(category: patent, Chinese translation: 专利)
Question: The claimed invention in a patent application is directed to an explosive composition "comprising 60-90% solid ammonium nitrate, and 10-40% water-in-oil in which sufficient aeration is entrapped to enhance sensitivity to a substantial degree." The application discloses that the explosive requires both fuel (the ammonium nitrate), and oxygen to "sensitize the composition." A prior art reference, published more than two years before the effective filing date of the application, discloses explosive compositions containing water-in-oil emulsions having identical ingredients to those claimed, in ranges overlapping with the claimed composition. The only element of the claim not recited in the reference is "sufficient aeration entrapped to enhance sensitivity to a substantial degree." The reference does not recognize that sufficient aeration sensitizes the fuel to a substantial degree. However, in fact, "sufficient aeration" is necessarily an inherent element in the prior art blasting composition within the overlapping ranges inasmuch as the blasting composition explodes. The prior art reference:
A. anticipates the claim because it discloses every limitation of the claim either explicitly or inherently.
B. does not anticipate the claim because the prior art reference does not recognize an inherent property.
C. does not anticipate the claim because the prior art reference does not recognize an inherent function of oxygen.
D. does not anticipate the claim because the prior art reference does not recognize an inherent ingredient, oxygen.
(category: patent，Chinese translation: 专利)