Cover image of Patent Bar MPEP Q & A Podcast
(6)
Education
Courses

Patent Bar MPEP Q & A Podcast

Updated 4 days ago

Education
Courses
Read more

Patent Bar Review

Read more

Patent Bar Review

iTunes Ratings

6 Ratings
Average Ratings
3
0
1
2
0

Good but could be great

By Sad.lame,;:$:/ - Aug 27 2019
Read more
The info is great, but 2 minutes of content and 1+ minute of ads means I have to listen to 3+ hours of ads in order to get through all of the content. Would be much better if multiple questions were combined into one podcast so that listeners don’t have to listen to the intro and outro over and over and over, which limits the usefulness of the material.

iTunes Ratings

6 Ratings
Average Ratings
3
0
1
2
0

Good but could be great

By Sad.lame,;:$:/ - Aug 27 2019
Read more
The info is great, but 2 minutes of content and 1+ minute of ads means I have to listen to 3+ hours of ads in order to get through all of the content. Would be much better if multiple questions were combined into one podcast so that listeners don’t have to listen to the intro and outro over and over and over, which limits the usefulness of the material.

Listen to:

Cover image of Patent Bar MPEP Q & A Podcast

Patent Bar MPEP Q & A Podcast

Updated 4 days ago

Read more

Patent Bar Review

Rank #1: MPEP Q & A 176: What Does a Petition Under 37 C.F.R. 1.78 Require?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: What does a petition under 37 C.F.R. 1.78 require? Answer: A petition under 37 CFR 1.78(b) requires: the reference required by 35 U.S.C. 119(e) and 37 CFR 1.78 to the prior-filed provisional application, which must be included in application data sheet (unless previously submitted in an application data sheet); the petition fee; and a […]

The post MPEP Q & A 176: What Does a Petition Under 37 C.F.R. 1.78 Require? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jul 09 2019

3mins

Play

Rank #2: MPEP Q & A 162: When is a 35 U.S.C. 102 Rejection with Multiple References Proper?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: When is a 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection with multiple references proper? Answer: A 35 U.S.C. 102 rejection over multiple references has been held to be proper when the extra references are cited to: Prove the primary reference contains an “enabled disclosure;” Explain the meaning of a term used in the primary reference; or Show […]

The post MPEP Q & A 162: When is a 35 U.S.C. 102 Rejection with Multiple References Proper? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Dec 21 2018

3mins

Play

Rank #3: MPEP Q & A 163: What are the Most Common Basis for Filing a Reissue Application?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: What are the most common basis for filing a reissue application? Answer: The most common bases for filing a reissue application are: the claims are too narrow or too broad; the disclosure contains inaccuracies; applicant failed to or incorrectly claimed foreign priority; and applicant failed to make reference to or incorrectly made reference to […]

The post MPEP Q & A 163: What are the Most Common Basis for Filing a Reissue Application? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jan 08 2019

3mins

Play

Rank #4: MPEP Q & A 144: What Should a Subject Matter Eligibility Rejection Under Step 2 Do?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: What should a subject matter eligibility rejection under Step 2 do? Answer: A subject matter eligibility rejection under Step 2 should: Identify the judicial exception by referring to what is recited (i.e., set forth or described) in the claim and explain why it is considered an exception; Identify any additional elements (specifically point to […]

The post MPEP Q & A 144: What Should a Subject Matter Eligibility Rejection Under Step 2 Do? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

May 29 2018

2mins

Play

Rank #5: MPEP Q & A 167: When Must Applicants Timely File a Notice of Foreign Filing to Avoid Abandonment of a U.S. Application?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: Name one circumstance where applicants must timely file a notice of foreign filing to avoid abandonment of a U.S. application. Answer: Applicants must timely file a notice of foreign filing to avoid abandonment of a U.S. application if: applicant filed a nonpublication request in the U.S. application filed under 35 U.S.C. 111(a); applicant subsequently […]

The post MPEP Q & A 167: When Must Applicants Timely File a Notice of Foreign Filing to Avoid Abandonment of a U.S. Application? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Mar 05 2019

3mins

Play

Rank #6: MPEP Q & A 148: The Duty of Disclosure in Reexamination Proceedings

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: Who does the duty of disclosure in reexamination proceedings apply to? Answer: The duty of disclosure in reexamination proceedings applies to the patent owner; to each attorney or agent who represents the patent owner, and to every other individual who is substantively involved on behalf of the patent owner. Chapter Details: The answer to […]

The post MPEP Q & A 148: The Duty of Disclosure in Reexamination Proceedings appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jun 26 2018

3mins

Play

Rank #7: MPEP Q & A 146: When Can a Combination as Claimed Show that Inventions are Distinct?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: When can a combination as claimed show that inventions are distinct? Answer: Inventions are distinct if it can be shown that a combination as claimed: (A) does not require the particulars of the subcombination as claimed for patentability (to show novelty and unobviousness), and (B) the subcombination can be shown to have utility either […]

The post MPEP Q & A 146: When Can a Combination as Claimed Show that Inventions are Distinct? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jun 12 2018

3mins

Play

Rank #8: MPEP Q & A 147: Post-Grant Reviews and Civil Actions

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: Can a post-grant review be instituted if, before the date on which the petition for such a review is filed, the petitioner or real party-in-interest filed a civil action challenging the validity of a claim of the patent? Answer: No, a post-grant review may not be instituted if, before the date on which the […]

The post MPEP Q & A 147: Post-Grant Reviews and Civil Actions appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jun 19 2018

2mins

Play

Rank #9: MPEP Q & A 154: What Does the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) Do?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: What does the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) do? Answer: The BRI sets the boundaries of the coverage sought by the claim and will influence whether the claim seeks to cover subject matter that is beyond the four statutory categories or encompasses subject matter that falls within the exceptions. Chapter Details: The answer to this […]

The post MPEP Q & A 154: What Does the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) Do? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Sep 04 2018

2mins

Play

Rank #10: MPEP Q & A 145: Methods For Paying a Maintenance Fee

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: How can a maintenance fee be paid? Answer: A maintenance fee may be paid: with cash with Treasury notes with national bank notes with post office money orders with certified checks over the internet by electronic funds transfer (EFT), credit card, or deposit account payment methods Chapter Details: The answer to this question can […]

The post MPEP Q & A 145: Methods For Paying a Maintenance Fee appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jun 05 2018

2mins

Play

Rank #11: MPEP Q & A 142: Examples of Evidence Under 37 C.F.R. 1.131(a)

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: List 2 examples of evidence under 37 C.F.R. 1.131(a). Answer: The allegations of fact might be supported by submitting as evidence one or more of the following: (A) attached sketches; (B) attached blueprints; (C) attached photographs; (D) attached reproductions of notebook entries; (E) an accompanying model; (F) attached supporting statements by witnesses, where verbal […]

The post MPEP Q & A 142: Examples of Evidence Under 37 C.F.R. 1.131(a) appeared first on Patent Education Series.

May 15 2018

3mins

Play

Rank #12: MPEP Q & A 181: Summary of Claim Construction Standard

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: What is the executive summary of the final rule when dealing with the claim construction standard that took effect on November 13, 2018? Answer: This final rule revises the rules for IPR, PGR, and CBM proceedings that implemented provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (‘‘AIA’’) providing for trials before the Office, by replacing […]

The post MPEP Q & A 181: Summary of Claim Construction Standard appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Sep 17 2019

4mins

Play

Rank #13: MPEP Q & A 153: When Will a Practitioner be Responsible for Another Practitioner’s Violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: When will a practitioner be responsible for another practitioner’s violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct? Answer: A practitioner shall be responsible for another practitioner’s violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct if: The practitioner orders or, with knowledge of the specific conduct, ratifies the conduct involved; or The practitioner is a […]

The post MPEP Q & A 153: When Will a Practitioner be Responsible for Another Practitioner’s Violation of the USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Aug 21 2018

2mins

Play

Rank #14: MPEP Q & A 143: Who Decides Petitions for Derivation and Conducts Any Ensuing Derivation Proceeding?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: Who decides petitions for derivation and conducts any ensuing derivation proceeding? Answer: The Patent Trial and Appeal Board will decide petitions for derivation and conduct any ensuing derivation proceeding. Chapter Details: The answer to this question can be found in the following supplement: Derivation Proceeding Final Rules. This is a special supplement that at the […]

The post MPEP Q & A 143: Who Decides Petitions for Derivation and Conducts Any Ensuing Derivation Proceeding? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

May 22 2018

2mins

Play

Rank #15: MPEP Q & A 165: When Patent Owner Fails to File Timely Response to Any Office Action Prior to an Action Closing Prosecution (ACP)

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: List one consequence for when the patent owner fails to file a timely response to any Office action prior to an Action Closing Prosecution (ACP). Answer: If the patent owner fails to file a timely response to any Office action prior to an Action Closing Prosecution (ACP), it will result in the following consequences: […]

The post MPEP Q & A 165: When Patent Owner Fails to File Timely Response to Any Office Action Prior to an Action Closing Prosecution (ACP) appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Feb 05 2019

4mins

Play

Rank #16: MPEP Q & A 152: Information an Attorney of Record May Have to Submit in Reply to an Office Action, Reissue Application, or Reexamination Proceeding

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: An attorney of record may have to submit information in reply to an Office action, a reissue application, or a reexamination proceeding. List 2 different types of information this may include. Answer: An attorney of record may have to submit information in reply to an Office action, a reissue application, or a reexamination proceeding; […]

The post MPEP Q & A 152: Information an Attorney of Record May Have to Submit in Reply to an Office Action, Reissue Application, or Reexamination Proceeding appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Aug 07 2018

3mins

Play

Rank #17: MPEP Q & A 175: Concepts Related to Tracking or Organizing Information

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: List a concept related to tracking or organizing information. Answer: Examples of concepts related to tracking or organizing information include; i. classifying and storing digital images in an organized manner ii. collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis iii. encoding and decoding image data – RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo […]

The post MPEP Q & A 175: Concepts Related to Tracking or Organizing Information appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jun 25 2019

3mins

Play

Rank #18: MPEP Q & A 151: Situations Where a Practitioner May Withdraw From Representing a Client According to 37 C.F.R. 11.116

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: List two situations where a practitioner may withdraw from representing a client according to 37 C.F.R. 11.116. Answer: A practitioner may withdraw from representing a client if: Withdrawal can be accomplished without material adverse effect on the interests of the client; The client persists in a course of action involving the practitioner’s services that […]

The post MPEP Q & A 151: Situations Where a Practitioner May Withdraw From Representing a Client According to 37 C.F.R. 11.116 appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Jul 24 2018

3mins

Play

Rank #19: MPEP Q & A 169: Non-Limiting Claims Not Directed to Any of the Statutory Categories.

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: Provide an example of a non-limiting claim that is not directed to any of the statutory categories. Answer: Examples of a non-limiting claim that is not directed to any of the statutory categories include; Products that do not have a physical or tangible form, such as information (often referred to as “data per se”) […]

The post MPEP Q & A 169: Non-Limiting Claims Not Directed to Any of the Statutory Categories. appeared first on Patent Education Series.

Apr 02 2019

3mins

Play

Rank #20: MPEP Q & A 173: What is a Complete Nonprovisional Application Comprised of?

Podcast cover
Read more

Question: What is a complete nonprovisional application comprised of? Answer: A complete nonprovisional application comprises the following: a specification, including claims, drawings, an oath or declaration, the prescribed filing fee, search fee, examination fee and application size fee Chapter Details: The answer to this question can be found in chapter 600 of the MPEP. This […]

The post MPEP Q & A 173: What is a Complete Nonprovisional Application Comprised of? appeared first on Patent Education Series.

May 28 2019

2mins

Play