NAME

Question Types


Start With


Question Limit

of 48 available terms

Advertisement Upgrade to remove ads

5 Written Questions

5 Matching Questions

  1. Does disclosure of less than the best mode invalidate a parent?
  2. When does the doctrine of equivalents arise?
  3. . Claims are Overly Broad
  4. Does the disclosure need to point out which of the embodiment is considered best?
  5. Enablement
  1. a Disclosure of less than the best mode does not invalidate a parent as long as the inventor as the time of the application did not know of the better method or did not recognize its superiority.
  2. b If the specification clearly recites a feature of the invention that is critical to the invention performing its intended operation, and the feature is not recited in the claims, ("purposely" making the claims broader than the enabling disclosure) a rejection based on lack of enablement will be made.
  3. c The specification must describe to one skilled in the art how to make and use the invention as of the filing date.
  4. d No, as long as it is among those disclosed
  5. e The doctrine of equivalents arises in the context of infringement action

5 Multiple Choice Questions

  1. Applicants can use whatever terms they chose for defining their invention in the claims, so long as those terms are not used in ways contrary to accepted meanings in the art. ("Oval" cannot be defined as trapezoidal.).
    The use of relative terms in claims is a factual and subjective test, not an objective test.
  2. The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention
  3. No, an amendment cannot rectify a failure to disclose
  4. 1) there must be a subjective determination as to whether at the time the application was filed, the inventor knew of a best mode of practicing the invention.
    2) if the inventor had a best mode of practicing the invention in mind, there must be an objective determination as to whether that best mode was disclosed in sufficient detail to allow one skilled in the art to practice it.
  5. An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.

5 True/False Questions

  1. 35 USC 112, first paragraph
    [MPEP 2161]
    An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.

          

  2. Best ModeExaminers should reject claims as prolix only when they contain such long recitations or unimportant details that the scope of the claimed invention is rendered indefinite thereby. Also, when the metes and bounds cannot be determined.

          

  3. Consistency with Specification or Prior ArtClaims are entitled to the foreign priority date of filing date of a provisional application if the foreign or provisional application supports the claims as required by § 112, paragraph 1.

          

  4. Omnibus claimsA Markush group which is a way of limiting claim to the members of the group of individual elements (e.g., members "selected from the group consisting of A, B and C") is definite. [A Markush group is a way of limiting a group to a set of individual elements. A markush group is used when a genus can be defined as a group that consists of particular individuals. It's a special/alternate way of expression that selects from a group "consisting of A, B and C" (closed-ended transition phrase). This wording is used (for among other reasons) to identify elements with a common trait, and the exact language must be used.]

          

  5. What four factors are among those to be used to determine whether necessary experimentation is "undue?"1) there must be a subjective determination as to whether at the time the application was filed, the inventor knew of a best mode of practicing the invention.
    2) if the inventor had a best mode of practicing the invention in mind, there must be an objective determination as to whether that best mode was disclosed in sufficient detail to allow one skilled in the art to practice it.

          

Create Set