The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
HALP: Another patent bar multiple choice question
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 6th, 2010 1:49 PM Author: kink-friendly corner haunted graveyard On 6/25/92, a Belgian inventor reduces to practice a widget. On 1/14/94, the inventor files a US patent application for it. The examiner rejects the claims due to a previous US patent app filed by Carrot on 6/26/92 that discloses the widget.
WHY is the Belgian inventor barred under 102(e) by this Carrot application?!? PLI just says it is, but can't the inventor show conception + reduction to practice a day before Carrot??
I must say, I am really getting annoyed with this PLI course never doing any analysis and just glossing over answers. |
 |
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:00 PM Author: Puce kitchen telephone was swearing behind one of the answer choices? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15978445) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:02 PM Author: kink-friendly corner haunted graveyard the question was "which 102 section, if any, would make the Belgian inventor not entitled to a patent?" Potential answers were: "102(a), 102(b), 102(d), 102(e), None of the the above"
I figured the answer was none because it seems like the inventor reduced to practice in Belgium a day before the Carrot application, but PLI says that is incorrect |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:07 PM Author: Puce kitchen telephone I would have guessed 102e through process of elimination.
You should have dome PRG. PLI seems pretty TTT. |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:11 PM Author: kink-friendly corner haunted graveyard how come you chose 102(e) instead of "None" Cant Belgian d00d show he invented the widget on 6/25/92. This is one day before the Carrot application which was filed on 6/26/92?
EDIT: nm answered below. And I probably should have, this PLI course sucks! |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:00 PM Author: titillating claret center it's been a while since I took patent, but isn't it a 103(e) rejection and the inventor can antedate by r.131? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15978446) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:05 PM Author: kink-friendly corner haunted graveyard 102(e) is the novelty rejection stating that a prior application for patent that describes the invention will prevent issue.
My confusion is stemming from the fact that it appeared the Belgian inventor reduced to practice in Belgium a day before the Carrot application was filed.
Can you not rely on a foreign reduction to practice for your invention date?? |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:08 PM Author: titillating claret center no, acts outside the united states cannot relied upon for inventive acts prior to Jan 1 1996 (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15978489) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:11 PM Author: soul-stirring talking therapy wrinkle You can only rely on foreign R2P in non-NAFTA WTO countries after January 1, 1996. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15978511) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:13 PM Author: kink-friendly corner haunted graveyard ok, thanks.
Jesus, wtf. Doesn't PLI think that might be fucking important to mention when going over the answers. I wasted like 30 minutes trying to figure this out. This prep blows |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:14 PM Author: soul-stirring talking therapy wrinkle Yeah, usually if you get a really old date you can assume that something pre-NAFTA R2P, pre-WTO R2P, or pre-AIPA is going on. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15978525) |
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:13 PM Author: Stimulating violet house wagecucks Holy fuck! You're going to flunk, Flunk, FLUNK! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15978522) |
|
Date: September 6th, 2010 2:18 PM Author: kink-friendly corner haunted graveyard :(
Anyone know any good patent bar prep websites that I can look at when PLI fails me again in subsequent questions? |
|
Date: September 7th, 2010 3:42 AM Author: Provocative gaped orchestra pit masturbator mypatentbar.com
seriously if you fail that test you are a moron.
go through the pli exam software over and over till you know the questions cold from the previous exams.
go to mypatentbar.com and memorize the recently asked questions over and over again till you know them cold.
you need 63 correct to pass, you will see 25-30 ish repeats. they give you the MPEP and you can do word searches. biggest tip ever: the mpep is a pdf and sometimes the words wrap to the next line and the prometric shit computer wont find it. so if you search for "reduction to practice" it might not find what you are looking for because on the page it reads " reduc tion to practice".
if you are not finding the word in a search try and break it up into pieces. this test is 70% previous questions and 30% your ability to look shit up in a book with a search function. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2010 7:36 AM Author: Mentally impaired jet library (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15985685) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2010 10:29 AM Author: Fishy roast beef Mostly credited except you need 70% to pass. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15985969) |
|
Date: September 7th, 2010 2:05 PM Author: soul-stirring talking therapy wrinkle 70% of the non-experimental questions, or 63 non-experimental questions. You can usually tell what the experimental questions are too.
That said, you really shouldn't take the exam until you're consistently getting at least 80-85% correct on practice exams. |
|
Date: September 7th, 2010 10:34 AM Author: adulterous ruddy cruise ship ladyboy you realize that passing the patent bar won't help your career prospects at all, right? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1415912&forum_id=2#15985992) |