Source: https://www.patenteducationseries.com/mpep-q-a-podcast/page/16
Timestamp: 2019-02-18 19:28:02
Document Index: 58333774

Matched Legal Cases: ['art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800', 'art-800']

MPEP Q and A Podcast – Page 16 – Patent Education Series
July 8, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/15-q1-1800-ready.mp3
List one procedural step that all international applications go through in the International Searching Authority.
The main procedural steps that any international application goes through in the International Searching Authority are:
the making of the international search,
the preparing of the international search report and
for international applications having an international filing date on or after January 1, 2004, the preparing of a written opinion of the International Searching Authority
This question and answer comes from section 1840 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 1840.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) agreed to and was appointed by the PCT Assembly, to act as an International Searching Authority. As such an Authority, the primary functions are to establish (1) international search reports and (2) for international applications having an international filing date on or after January 1, 2004, written opinions.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-07-08 09:00:322016-09-04 17:09:24MPEP Q & A 15: Procedural Step for International Applications Going Through the International Searching Authority
July 5, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/14-q1-1300-ready.mp3
What must a request for simultaneous issue contain?
The request must contain the following information about each allowed application for which simultaneous issue is requested; application number, filing date, name(s) of inventor(s), title of invention, and date of allowance.
This question and answer comes from section 1306.02 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 1306.02.
1306.02 Simultaneous Issuance of Patents
Where applications have been allowed and a Notice of Allowance and Fee(s) Due has been mailed in each application, a request for simultaneous issuance will be granted. Unless all the applications have reached this stage of processing, or a specific requirement of the regulations is involved, a request for simultaneous issuance generally will not be granted.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-07-05 09:00:152016-09-04 21:58:23MPEP Q & A 14: Request for Simultaneous Issue
July 1, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/13-q1-1500-ready.mp3
What is the term of a utility patent versus the term of a design patent?
The term of a utility patent on an application filed on or after June 8, 1995 is 20 years measured from the U.S. filing date; or if the application contains a specific reference to an earlier application, 20 years from the earliest effective U.S. filing date, while the term of a design patent is 15 years measured from the date of grant, if the design application was filed on or after May 13, 2015 (or 14 years if filed before May 13, 2015).
This question and answer comes from section 1502.01 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 1502.01.
1502.01 Distinction Between Design and Utility Patents
In general terms, a “utility patent” protects the way an article is used and works,while a “design patent” protects the way an article looks. This section further outlines the common differences between design and utility patents.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-07-01 09:00:232016-09-04 21:59:04MPEP Q & A 13: Term of Utility vs. Design Patent
June 28, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/12-q1-2100-ready.mp3
What are the two separate and distinct requirements of 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph?
35 U.S.C. 112(b) or Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph contains two separate and distinct requirements:
The first one is that the claim(s) set forth the subject matter applicants regard as the invention, and
The second one is that the claim(s) particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention.
This question and answer comes from section 2171 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 2171.
2171 Two Separate Requirements for Claims Under 35 U.S.C. 112 (b) or Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, Second Paragraph
This section covers the two separate requirements for claims under the second paragraph or paragraph (b) of 35 U.S.C. 112. These requirements include that the claims must set forth the subject matter that the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention; and the claims must particularly point out and distinctly define the metes and bounds of the subject matter to be protected by the patent grant.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-28 09:00:442016-09-04 21:59:44MPEP Q & A 12: Two Separate and Distinct Requirements for 35 U.S.C. 112(b)
MPEP Q & A 11: Items Required in an Appeal Brief
June 24, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/11-q1-1200-ready.mp3
List two items which are required in an appeal brief.
The specific items required in an appeal brief are:
(ii) Related appeals, interferences, and trials.
This question and answer comes from section 1205.02 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 1205.02.
1205.02 Appeal Brief Content
The arguments in an appeal brief must be responsive to every ground of rejection stated by the Examiner along with explanation of why the examiner erred in the ground of rejection. This section further covers the content required in an appeal brief. The specific items required include the real party of interest, related appeals, interferences, and trials, a summary of claimed subject matter, an argument, and a claims appendix. Each of these required items is discussed in detail.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-24 09:00:302016-09-04 22:00:32MPEP Q & A 11: Items Required in an Appeal Brief
MPEP Q & A 10: Contesting an Objection
June 21, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/10-q1-700-ready.mp3
What is one way an applicant may contest an objection?
An applicant may contest an objection by:
asking the examiner to reconsider it.
filing a petition to the Commissioner.
The answer to this question can be found in chapter 700 of the MPEP. This chapter covers the examination of applications.
This question comes from section 706.01 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 706.01.
706.01 Contrasted With Objections
This section covers the differences between rejections and objections. The practical difference between a rejection and an objection is that a rejection, involving the merits of the claim, is subject to review by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, while an objection, if persisted, may be reviewed only by way of petition to the Director of the USPTO.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-21 09:00:572016-09-04 22:01:33MPEP Q & A 10: Contesting an Objection
MPEP Q & A 9: Two Types of Double Patenting Rejections
June 17, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/9-q1-800-ready.mp3
What are the two types of double patenting rejections?
There are generally two types of double patenting rejections.
One is the “same invention” type double patenting rejection based on 35 U.S.C. 101 which states in the singular that an inventor “may obtain a patent.”
The second is the “nonstatutory-type” double patenting rejection based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy and which is primarily intended to prevent prolongation of the patent term by prohibiting claims in a second patent not patentably distinct from claims in a first patent.
The answer to this question can be found in chapter 800 of the MPEP. This chapter covers the Restriction in Applications Filed Under 35 U.S.C. 111; Double Patenting.
This question comes from section 804 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 804.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-17 09:00:542016-09-04 22:02:18MPEP Q & A 9: Two Types of Double Patenting Rejections
MPEP Q & A 8: Filings Third-Party Submissions May Not Be Directed To
June 14, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/8-q1-1100-ready.mp3
List at least one type of filing that third-party submissions may not be directed to.
Third-party submissions may not be directed to:
issued patents,
reissue applications, and
The answer to this question can be found in chapter 1100 of the MPEP. This chapter covers the Statutory Invention Registration (SIR); Pre-Grant Publication (PGPub) and Preissuance Submissions.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-14 09:00:522016-09-04 22:03:08MPEP Q & A 8: Filings Third-Party Submissions May Not Be Directed To
MPEP Q & A 7: Type of Descriptions of the Interest Conveyed or the Transaction to Be Recorded
June 10, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/7-q1-300-ready.mp3
List two examples of the type of descriptions of the interest conveyed or transaction to be recorded that can be identified.
The answer to this question can be found in chapter 300 of the MPEP. This chapter covers ownership and assignment.
This is from the 9th Edition, Revision 07.2015. Depending on future changes to the MPEP, the question and answer may or may not be applicable in later Editions or revisions.
This question comes from section 302.07 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 302.07.
302.07 Assignment Document Must Be Accompanied by a Cover Sheet
This section covers details on how the assignment document must be accompanied by a cover sheet.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-10 09:00:472016-09-04 22:03:56MPEP Q & A 7: Type of Descriptions of the Interest Conveyed or the Transaction to Be Recorded
MPEP Q & A 6: Applicant Initiated Interview Request Forms
June 7, 2016 /0 Comments/in MPEP Q and A Podcast /by Lisa Parmley
https://media.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/p/content.blubrry.com/ipenterprises/6-q1-400-ready.mp3
What should an Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form include?
An Applicant Initiated Interview Request Form should identify the participants of the interview, the proposed date of the interview, whether the interview will be personal, telephonic, or video conference, and should include a brief description of the issues to be discussed.
The answer to this question can be found in chapter 400 of the MPEP. This chapter covers representative of the applicant or owner.
The question is from the 9th Edition, Revision 07.2015. Depending on future changes to the MPEP, the question and answer may or may not be applicable in later Editions or revisions.
This question comes from section 408 of the MPEP. The following is a brief summary of section 408.
408 Interviews With Patent Practitioner of Record
When an applicant is initiating a request for an interview, an “Applicant Initiated Interview Request” form should be submitted to the examiner prior to the interview in order to permit the examiner to prepare in advance for the interview and to focus on the issues to be discussed.
https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/mpep-podcast-art-800.jpg 800 800 Lisa Parmley https://www.patenteducationseries.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/logo-centric-bw.png Lisa Parmley2016-06-07 09:00:142016-09-04 22:04:36MPEP Q & A 6: Applicant Initiated Interview Request Forms