MPEP Q & A 315: List Examples Of Situations That Confirm A “real World” Context Of Use. Patent Bar MPEP Q & A podcast

Artwork

Questions And Answers Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 Lisa Parmley USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 Law News Politics Business Business Disciplines Podcasting Education

Player FM - Internet Radio Done Right

44 subscribers

Agregado hace ocho años

Contenido proporcionado por Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006, Lisa Parmley, and USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006. Todo el contenido del podcast, incluidos episodios, gráficos y descripciones de podcast, lo carga y proporciona directamente Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006, Lisa Parmley, and USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 o su socio de plataforma de podcast. Si cree que alguien está utilizando su trabajo protegido por derechos de autor sin su permiso, puede seguir el proceso descrito aquí https://es.player.fm/legal.

<

<div class="span index">1</div> <span><a class="" data-remote="true" data-type="html" href="/series/talkin-politics-religion-without-killin-each-other">Talkin‘ Politics & Religion Without Killin‘ Each Other</a></span>

<div class="span index">1</div> <span><a class="" data-remote="true" data-type="html" href="/series/talkin-politics-religion-without-killin-each-other">Talkin‘ Politics & Religion Without Killin‘ Each Other</a></span> podcast artwork

<div class="span index">1</div> <span><a class="" data-remote="true" data-type="html" href="/series/talkin-politics-religion-without-killin-each-other">Talkin‘ Politics & Religion Without Killin‘ Each Other</a></span> podcast artwork

1
Talkin‘ Politics & Religion Without Killin‘ Each Other

Cancelar la suscripción

hace 10 hourshace 10h ago

Cancelar la suscripción

Semanalmente+

Politics and Religion. We’re not supposed to talk about that, right? Wrong! We only say that nowadays because the loudest, most extreme voices have taken over the whole conversation. Well, we‘re taking some of that space back! If you’re dying for some dialogue instead of all the yelling; if you know it’s okay to have differences without having to hate each other; if you believe politics and religion are too important to let ”the screamers” drown out the rest of us and would love some engaging, provocative and fun conversations about this stuff, then ”Talkin‘ Politics & Religion Without Killin‘ Each Other” is for you!

Patent Bar MPEP Q & A Podcast « »
MPEP Q & A 315: List examples of situations that confirm a “real world” context of use.

hace un año 3:11

Compartir

MP3•Episodio en casa

Contenido proporcionado por Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006, Lisa Parmley, and USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006. Todo el contenido del podcast, incluidos episodios, gráficos y descripciones de podcast, lo carga y proporciona directamente Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006, Lisa Parmley, and USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 o su socio de plataforma de podcast. Si cree que alguien está utilizando su trabajo protegido por derechos de autor sin su permiso, puede seguir el proceso descrito aquí https://es.player.fm/legal.

Question: List two examples of situations that require or constitute carrying out further research to identify or reasonably confirm a “real world” context of use and, therefore, do not define “substantial utilities.” Answer: The following are examples of situations that require or constitute carrying out further research to identify or reasonably confirm a “real world” […]

The post MPEP Q & A 315: List examples of situations that confirm a “real world” context of use. appeared first on Patent Education Series.

… continue reading

310 episodios

#Questions And Answers #Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 #Lisa Parmley #USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 #Law #News #Politics #Business #Business Disciplines #Podcasting Education

Artwork

MPEP Q & A 315: List examples of situations that confirm a “real world” context of use.

Patent Bar MPEP Q & A Podcast

44 subscribers

published hace un año

Compartir

MP3•Episodio en casa

Contenido proporcionado por Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006, Lisa Parmley, and USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006. Todo el contenido del podcast, incluidos episodios, gráficos y descripciones de podcast, lo carga y proporciona directamente Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006, Lisa Parmley, and USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 o su socio de plataforma de podcast. Si cree que alguien está utilizando su trabajo protegido por derechos de autor sin su permiso, puede seguir el proceso descrito aquí https://es.player.fm/legal.

Question: List two examples of situations that require or constitute carrying out further research to identify or reasonably confirm a “real world” context of use and, therefore, do not define “substantial utilities.” Answer: The following are examples of situations that require or constitute carrying out further research to identify or reasonably confirm a “real world” […]

The post MPEP Q & A 315: List examples of situations that confirm a “real world” context of use. appeared first on Patent Education Series.

… continue reading

310 episodios

#Questions And Answers #Lisa Parmley, USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 #Lisa Parmley #USPTO Patent Practitioner #51006 #Law #News #Politics #Business #Business Disciplines #Podcasting Education

Todos los episodios

×

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 324: Name items that must be submitted when adding a “Sequence Listing” after the application filing date. 3:01

hace 5 días3:01

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:01

Question: Name at least two items that must be submitted when adding a “Sequence Listing” after the application filing date. Answer: Adding a “Sequence Listing” after the application filing date involves the submission of: (1) a “Sequence Listing” either as a PDF image file, on physical sheets of paper, or as an ASCII plain text […] The post MPEP Q & A 324: Name items that must be submitted when adding a “Sequence Listing” after the application filing date. appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 323: Can distinct subject matter be recovered by filing a reissue application in specific cases? 3:19

hace 19 días3:19

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:19

Question: Where a restriction (including an election of species) requirement was made in an application and applicant permitted the elected invention to issue as a patent without filing a divisional application on the non-elected invention(s) or on non-claimed subject matter distinct from the elected invention, can the non-elected invention(s) and non-claimed, distinct subject matter be […] The post MPEP Q & A 323: Can distinct subject matter be recovered by filing a reissue application in specific cases? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 322: What type of Demand will prevent an international application designating the U.S. to enter? 2:26

hace 5 weeks2:26

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

2:26

Question: What type of Demand will prevent an international application designating the U.S. to enter the national stage via the U.S. Designated Office? Answer: An international application designating the U.S. will enter the national stage via the U.S. Designated Office unless a Demand electing the U.S. is filed under PCT Article 31 whereupon entry will be via […] The post MPEP Q & A 322: What type of Demand will prevent an international application designating the U.S. to enter? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 321: What are the factual inquiries related to obviousness? 3:41

hace 7 weeks3:41

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:41

Question: What are the factual inquiries related to obviousness that the Court enunciates? Answer: Obviousness is a question of law based on underlying factual inquiries. The factual inquiries enunciated by the Court are as follows: (A) Determining the scope and content of the prior art; (B) Ascertaining the differences between the claimed invention and the […] The post MPEP Q & A 321: What are the factual inquiries related to obviousness? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 320: What are the three types of designs interpreted by case law to include? 2:22

hace 9 weeks2:22

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

2:22

Question: What are the three types of designs the language “new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture” has been interpreted by the case law to include? Answer: The language “new, original and ornamental design for an article of manufacture” has been interpreted by the case law to include at least three kinds of designs: […] The post MPEP Q & A 320: What are the three types of designs interpreted by case law to include? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 319: What must any assignment-related document for patent matters submitted by facsimile include? 2:11

hace 11 weeks2:11

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

2:11

Question: What three items must any assignment-related document for patent matters submitted by facsimile include? Answer: Any assignment-related document for patent matters submitted by facsimile must include: (A) an identified application or patent number; (B) one cover sheet to record a single transaction; and (C) payment of the recordation fee by a credit card, is […] The post MPEP Q & A 319: What must any assignment-related document for patent matters submitted by facsimile include? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 318: Requirements of an oath or declaration under section 37 CFR 1.63. 2:39

hace 13 weeks2:39

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

2:39

Question: Name two requirements of an oath or declaration under section 37 CFR 1.63? Answer: An oath or declaration under section 37 CFR 1.63 must: (1) Identify the inventor or joint inventor executing the oath or declaration by his or her legal name; (2) Identify the application to which it is directed; (3) Include a […] The post MPEP Q & A 318: Requirements of an oath or declaration under section 37 CFR 1.63. appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 317: How can you determine whether the original patent requirement is satisfied in a reissue application? 3:02

hace 15 weeks3:02

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:02

Question: How can you determine whether the original patent requirement is satisfied in a reissue application? Answer: Examiners should review the reissue application to determine whether the original patent requirement is satisfied, by considering if: (A) the claims presented in the reissue application are described in the original patent specification and enabled by the original […] The post MPEP Q & A 317: How can you determine whether the original patent requirement is satisfied in a reissue application? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 316: Is it ever necessary to change the inventorship named in the application? 3:52

hace 17 weeks3:52

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:52

Question: If an application by joint inventors includes more than one independent and distinct invention, and restriction is required, is it ever necessary to change the inventorship named in the application? Answer: If an application by joint inventors includes more than one independent and distinct invention, and restriction is required, it may become necessary to […] The post MPEP Q & A 316: Is it ever necessary to change the inventorship named in the application? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 315: List examples of situations that confirm a “real world” context of use. 3:11

hace 19 weeks3:11

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:11

Question: List two examples of situations that require or constitute carrying out further research to identify or reasonably confirm a “real world” context of use and, therefore, do not define “substantial utilities.” Answer: The following are examples of situations that require or constitute carrying out further research to identify or reasonably confirm a “real world” […] The post MPEP Q & A 315: List examples of situations that confirm a “real world” context of use. appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 314: What will the request indicate for each patent and printed publication cited in the request? 3:30

hace 21 weeks3:30

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:30

Question: When an examiner concludes that no substantial new question of patentability has been raised, they will prepare a decision denying the reexamination request. What will that request indicate for each patent and printed publication cited in the request? Answer: If the examiner concludes that no substantial new question of patentability has been raised, the […] The post MPEP Q & A 314: What will the request indicate for each patent and printed publication cited in the request? appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 313: Reasons why the Office will withdraw the application from issue. 2:19

hace 23 weeks2:19

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

2:19

Question: Once the issue fee has been paid, list two reasons why the Office will withdraw the application from issue at its own initiative. Answer: Once the issue fee has been paid, the Office will not withdraw the application from issue at its own initiative for any reason except: (1) A mistake on the part […] The post MPEP Q & A 313: Reasons why the Office will withdraw the application from issue. appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 312: List two General Plastic non-exclusive factors. 3:18

hace 25 weeks3:18

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:18

Question: List two General Plastic non-exclusive factors. Answer: The General Plastic non-exclusive factors include the following: Whether the same petitioner previously filed a petition directed to the same claims of the same patent; Whether at the time of filing of the first petition the petitioner knew of the prior art asserted in the second petition […] The post MPEP Q & A 312: List two General Plastic non-exclusive factors. appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 311: Two requirements for a petition for suspension of action under 37 CFR 1.103(a) 3:23

hace 27 weeks3:23

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:23

Question: List two requirements for a petition for suspension of action under 37 CFR 1.103(a). Answer: A petition for suspension of action under 37 CFR 1.103(a) must: (A) be presented as a separate paper; (B) be accompanied by the petition fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(g); (C) request a specific and reasonable period of suspension not greater than […] The post MPEP Q & A 311: Two requirements for a petition for suspension of action under 37 CFR 1.103(a) appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Artwork

1
MPEP Q & A 310: List two examples of notices issued as part of the pre-examination processing of an application 3:29

hace 29 weeks3:29

Reproducir más Tarde

Reproducir más Tarde

3:29

Question: The three-month period in 37 CFR 1.704(b) applies to the Office notices and letters issued as part of the pre-examination processing of an application (except a Notice of Omitted Items in a Nonprovisional Application as discussed above). List two examples of these notices. Answer: These notices include: A Notice of Incomplete Nonprovisional Application (except as to […] The post MPEP Q & A 310: List two examples of notices issued as part of the pre-examination processing of an application appeared first on Patent Education Series .…

Bienvenido a Player FM!

Player FM está escaneando la web en busca de podcasts de alta calidad para que los disfrutes en este momento. Es la mejor aplicación de podcast y funciona en Android, iPhone y la web. Regístrate para sincronizar suscripciones a través de dispositivos.

Escucha más de 500 temas

Escucha este programa mientras exploras