U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS.

Transcription

1 Test Number 014 Test Series 293 NAME U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS October 1993 Morning Section (100 Points) Time: 3 Hours DIRECfiONS This section of the examination is an open book examination. You may use books, notes, or other written materials that you believe will be of help to you except you may not use prior registration examination questions and/or answers. Books, notes or other written materials containing prior registration examination questions and/or answers cannot be brought into or used in the room where this examination is being administered. If you have such materials, you must give them to the test administrator before this section of the examination begins. All questions must be answered in SECTION 1 of the Answer Sheet which is provided to you by the test administrator. You must use a No.2 (or softer) lead pencil to record your answers on the Answer Sheet Darken completely the circle corresponding to your answer. You must keep your mark within the circle. Erase completely all marks except your answer. Stray marks may be counted as answers. No points will be awarded for incorrect answers or unanswered questions. Questions answered by darkening more than one circle will be considered as being incorrectly answered. This section of the examination consists of fifty (50) multiple choice questions, each worth two (2) points. Do not assume any additional facts not presented in the questions. When answering each question, unless otherwise stated assume that you are a registered patent agent. The most correct answer is the policy, practice and procedure which must, shall or should be followed in accordance with the U.S. patent statutes, the PTO rules of practice and procedure, and the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP), unless modified by a subsequent court decision or a notice in the Official Gazette. There is only one most correct answer to each question. Where choices (A) through (D) are correct and the last choice is" All of the above", the grouped answer will be the most correct answer. Where a question includes a statement with one or more blanks or ends with a colon, select the answer from the choices given to complete the statement which would make the statement true. Unless otherwise explicitly stated, all references to patents orapplicationsare to be understood a$ being U.S. patents or applications for utility inventions only, as opposed to plant or design inventions. Where the terms "USPTO, "PTO" or "Office" are used in this examination, they mean the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. You may write anywhere on this examination booklet. However, do not remove any pages from the booklet. Only answers recorded in Section 1 of your Answer Sheet will be graded. YOU MUST SCORE AT LEAST 70 POINTS TO PASS THIS SECTION OF Tiffi REGISTRATION EXAMINATION. DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE INSTRUCTED TO CHECK THE CONTENTS OF THIS EXAMINATION BOOKLET OR TO BEGIN THE EXAMINATION 1

2 1. On November 2, 1992, you filed a U.S. patent application in the PTO on behalf of your client, Jones, for a board game for learning the alphabet. The application is titled "Board Game". You have not received a filing receipt. Five months after filing the U.S. application, Jones requests expedited foreign filing. While you are on vacation in the Caribbean, your secretary, without deceptive intent and without consulting you, authorizes your French patent agent to file an application, corresponding to Jones' U.S. application, in the French Patent Office. Upon discovering these events, what should you most properly advise your client as to the status of the U.S. application? (A) The application is abandoned due to the foreign disclosure in violation of a secrecy order. (B) The application is abandoned for filing the French application without first obtaining a foreign filing license. (C) The application is pending, however, a foreign filing license must be applied for retroactively inasmuch as the foreign filing was through error without deceptive intent and the invention does not involve the national security. (D) The application is pending since there was no need to obtain a foreign filing license since the invention is a board game, and is not detrimental to the national security. (E) The application is pending, however, in order to preserve the filing date, both the U.S. and French applications should be abandoned and a continuation of the U.S application should be filed claiming priority back to November 2, Tony and Dan work for Mama Mia's Spaghetti Sauce Company and have invented a new machine for mashing tomatoes. Leo serves as patent liaison between the inventors and a registered patent agent, Mary, who has been retained by Mama Mia's. Mary prepares a patent application on behalf of Tony and Dan which includes claims directed to their new machine. Leo is not a registered practitioner although he did assist Mary in the preparation of the patent application. Given only the facts set forth above, if Tony, Dan, Leo and Mary become aware of information which is material to the patentability of the claim~ in the application, who has a duty to disclose that information to the PTO? (A) Tony, Dan and Mary (B) Leo and Mary (C) Mary (D) Tony, Dan, and Leo (E) Tony, Dan, Leo and Mary 3. Which of the following statements is true with regard to the "best mode" requirement of 35 U.S.C. 112? (A) The best mode requirement may be satisfied even though the application does not contain a specific working example of the invention. (B) If the specification of a patent application contains sufficient disclosure to comprehend the invention, then the application automatically satisfies the best mode requirement. (C) If the best mode contemplated by the inventor at the time of filing the application is not disclosed in the application, it can be added by an amendment before the first Office action in the application, provided the amendment is accompanied by a declaration or oath by the inventor stating that the best mode was a part of his invention prior to the application filing date. 2

3 (D) In order to satisfy the best mode requirement, the patent applicant must disclose a method for mass production of the invention. (E) If, after a patent application is filed but before the application is allowed, the inventor finds a new mode of carrying out the invention which is better than any mode set forth in the patent application, then the inventor must file an amendment adding to the specification a description of the new best mode. 4. On Friday, November 6, 1992, an Office action was mailed in which the examiner made a final rejection of all of the claims in a patent application. The examiner set a three month shortened statutory period for response to the Office action. On Friday, March 19, 1993, a proposed amendment along with a proper petition for a two month extension of time and the proper extension of time fee were filed in the PTO. On Friday, April 9, 1993, an Advisory Action was mailed to the applicant maintaining the rejection and advising applicant that the amendment was entered, but that it did not overcome the final rejection. On Wednesday, April 14, 1993, a Notice of Appeal and the proper appeal fee were filed in the PTO. On Saturday, May 1, 1993, you noted that a third month extension of time had not been filed with the Notice of Appeal. A proper petition for a third month extension of time with the proper fee were received in the PTO on Thursday May 6, 1993 with a proper certificate of mailing dated Sunday, May 2, If there was no further request for an extension of time, what is the last date on which the Appeal Brief is due? (A) Wednesday, June 9, 1993 (B) Monday, June 14, 1993 (C) Friday, July 2, 1993 (D) Tuesday, July 6, 1993 (E) None of the above. 5. After a patent has issued, which of the following changes can be made properly by a certificate of correction?.(a) Addition of another example to illustrate the best mode. (B) Correction of a typographical error. (C) Addition of further claims of a narrower scope. (D) Correction of test data in a descriptive portion of the specification which data has changed since the issuance of the patent. (E) Addition of a drawing depicting a figure of another embodiment of the invention disclosed in the original disclosure. 6. Which of the following is a drawing requirement? (A) The drawing must be in black India ink on three-ply Bristol board. (B) The size of the drawing sheets must be exactly 11 by 17 inches. (C) Every feature specified in the claims must be shown in the drawing. (D) Mechanical components must be drawn exactly to scale. (E) Erroneously drawn lines must be covered over with white correction fluid. 3

4 7. A patent was issued to inventor Smith who had assigned the invention to a business which qualified as a small entity. Your firm has undertaken the responsibility to pay the maintenance fee. At the time the first maintenance fee is due, which of the following determinations, if any, should you make before paying the maintenance fee? (A) Detennine only whether the ownership of the patent has changed since the issue fee was paid. (B) Determine whether the patentee qualifies as a small business or non-profit organization. (C) Determine whether the patentee has sold or licensed any rights or is obliged to sell or license any rights to a small business or non-profit organization. (D) Determine whether the current owner of the patent qualifies as a small entity and determine whether the current owner of the patent has sold or licensed any rights or is obliged to sell or license any rights to an entity which does not qualify as a small entity. (E) None of the above. 8. You received a final rejection dated Wednesday June 2, 1993, on a application you are prosecuting in the PTO. The examiner set a three month shortened statutory period for response. On Tuesday, September 7, 1993, you mailed to the PTO a Notice of Appeal with a proper certificate of mailing dated September 7, 1993, and a proper petition for a one month extension of time. However, you inadvertently forgot to include the fee for the extension of time with your response. On Thursday, September 9, 1993, the Notice of Appeal was received in the PTO. Today, October 13, 1993, you received a notice from the PTO informing you that there is a fee deficiency. Which of the following actions, if any, would be most appropriate to take to prevent abandonment of the application? (A) Submit a renewed request for an extension of time for one month along with the required fee. (B) Submit a request for an extension of time for two months along with the required fee therefor. (C) Submit a cover letter with the required fee for a one month extension of time. (D) Submit a petition to revive the application. (E) None of the above. 9. Your Japanese client has asked you to file a U.S. patent application on his invention corresponding to his Japanese patent application which was filed in the Japanese Patent Office on October 13, Your client wants the benefit of the priority date of the Japanese patent application. The only document you have received from you client is a copy of the original Japanese application. If you file only the copy of the Japanese patent application today, October 13, 1993, along with a cover letter in English specifying the name of the applicant, the title of the invention, and the number of pages of specification and drawings, will your client be able to obtain today's filing date? (A) No, because a verified translation must accompany the foreign language application. (B) No, because the application is not in the English language. (C) No, because the application did not include the oath and filing fee. (D) Yes, because a foreign language application may be filed in an emergency situation such as this to preserve your client's rights. (E) Yes, but only if the filing is accompanied by a petition requesting that the application be accepted for filing date purposes only. 4

5 10. You are a sole practitioner. In an effort to secure clients, you have placed an advertisement in the latest issue of General Mechanics. Your advertisement reads as follows: INVENTORS!!! Do you want a patent at a reasonable cost? Call Free initial consultation! Would your advertisement violate the PTO Code of Professional Responsibility? (A) No, because the PTO Code of Professional Responsibility permits advertisements in magazines. (B) No, because you have not given anything of value to General Mechanics for recommending your services. (C) Yes, because the advertisement does not include your name. (D) Yes, because the advertisement is misleading. Free consultations are not permitted by the PTO Code of Professional Responsibility. (E) Yes, because the advertisement does not indicate that you are a registered patent agent. 11. You are prosecuting a patent application on appeal before the Board of Patent Appeals and Patent Interferences. On reviewing the application, the Board discovered a patent to Thomas which issued in 1979 and which is of record in the application, but which was not applied in a rejection of any claim. In its decision, dated today, October 13, 1993, the Board reversed all of the rejections made by the examiner and rejected one claim under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Thomas. A two month shortened statutory period for response was set by the Board relative to the rejection of the one claim based upon the Thomas patent. You do not agree with the Board's rejection. What would be an appropriate action to take in response to this new rejection? (A) Recommend to the patent applicant to consult an attorney to appeal the decision of the Board to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. (B) File a petition for an extension of time under 37 CFR 1.136(a) along with the proper fee and request reconsideration of the rejection by the Board. (C) Request that the Board enter an amendment of the rejected claim, which in your opinion, would overcome the Board's rejection. (D) Submit an argument to the examiner asserting that the Board's decision is not well founded. (E) Submit a showing of facts not previously of record which in your opinion overcomes the new ground of rejection and request the Board to remand the application to the examiner. 12. In which of the following circumstances can a practitioner properly petition to have an application given "special" status with no fee? (A) The invention is deemed of peculiar importance to the U.S. Department of Education. (B) The applicant is over 65 years of age. (C) The invention relates to recombinant DNA. (D) A prospective manufacturer with sufficient presently available capital and facilities is ready to manufacture the invention upon allowance of the patent application. (E) There is an infringing device actually on the market. 5

6 Questions below are based on the following factual scenario. Unless otherwise indicated, answer each question independently of the other questions. On November 13, 1989, in Queensland, Australia, inventor Jones invented a manually operated shearing tool which permits a sheep to be shorn in one-half the usual time. The tool comprises a unique cutting mech~nism having a.!:.q!ill:y arrangement of the cutting elements. Jones instructed an Australian patent attorney, Smith, to obtain patent protection in Australia. Smith prepared the patent application on the inventive shearing tool and filed the application in the Australian Patent Office on January 23, On July 26, 1990, Jones sold 10,000 of his inventive shearing tools to Roof-Mart, Limited, located in Sydney, Australia. On August 2, 1990, Roof-Mart returned all of the tools because an unusually high number of the shearing tools would jam or break. After inspecting the returned shearing tools and determining why the shears would either jam or break, Jones modified the cutting mechanism to a sickle arrangement of the cutting elements. On September 10, 1990, after exhaustive tests at his sheep ranch in Queensland, Jones considered his invention complete. He proceeded to manufacture the modified shears having the sickle arrangement of the cutting elements. On October 20, 1990, in exchange for tools returned, Jones gave Roof-Mart 10,000 shears having the sickle arrangement. On October 24, 1990, Jones sold 5,000 of the modified shears to Floor-Mart, Limited, located in Brisbane, Australia. The shears having the sickle arrangement became an instant success with the outback sheep ranchers. The commercial success of the sickle arrangement was not related to any advertising or promotion by Jones. Because of the problems associated with the rotary arrangement, Jones decided to file a second Australian patent application and limit his claims to the sickle arrangement. Accordingly, on December 12, 1990, Smith filed a second application in the Australian Patent Office for Jones with claims only to the sickle arrangement, and abandoned the original Australian application. At the time of abandonment of the original Australian application, it had not been laid open for public inspection, and Jones had left no rights outstanding. The second Australian application issued as a patent on October 23, Jones decided to make his brother, Tom, who resides in Kansas City, Kansas, his U.S. distributor for the modified shearing tool. Jones sent to Tom a sample of his modified shear having the sickle arrangement of the cutting elements. Tom received the sample on January 14, Jones visited his brother in August of On August 28, 1991, after Tom agreed to be the U.S. distributor for the modified shears, Jones instructed Smith to file a patent application in the United States which corresponded word for word to the second Australian patent application. The U.S. application was prepared by a you and filed in the PTO on October 25, The U.S. application contained ten claims, all directed to shears having the sickle arrangement. The examiner properly rejected claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) as being anticipated by a U.S. patent to Ima Genius. The Genius patent was granted on November 5, 1991 on an application filed in the PTO on January 16, Claims 1-5 were rejected under 35 U.S. C. 102(d) over Jones' Australian patent which issued on October 23, Claims 2-5 were properly rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over the Genius patent in view of a U.S. patent to Smart which was granted on March 7,

7 13. Which of the following actions, if any, would conform with proper PTO practice and procedure and could properly overcome the examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(e)? (A) File an antedating affidavit swearing back of the filing date of the Genius patent on the basis of evidence showing completion of the invention on September 10, 1990 in Queensland. (B) File the appropriate documents and claim foreign priority based on the filing date of Jones' original Australian patent application. (C) File the appropriate documents and claim foreign priority based on the filing date of Jones' second filed Australian patent application. (D) File an affidavit presenting evidence of commercial success of the sickle arrangement. (E) None of the above. 14. Which of the following actions would conform with proper PTO practice and procedure and could properly overcome the Examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(d)? (A) File a response pointing out that the Australian patent was not filed more than 12 months before the date of the U.S. application. (B) File an antedating affidavit swearing back of the filing date of the second Australian patent showing completion of the claimed invention on September 10, 1990 in Queensland. (C) File the appropriate documents and claim foreign priority based on the filing date of Jones' original Australian patent application. (D) Abandon the application because the claimed shears were sold more than a year before the filing date of the U.S. application. (E) All of the above. 15. Which of the following actions would conform with proper PTO practice and procedure and could properly overcome the examiner's rejection under 35 U.S.C. 103? (A) File an antedating affidavit swearing back of the filing date of the Genius patent by showing the date Tom received in Kansas City, Kansas, the sample of the shears having the sickle arrangement. (B) File the appropriate documents and claim foreign priority based on the filing date of Jones' original Australian patent application. (C) File an affidavit presenting evidence of commercial success of the sickle arrangement. (D) File documents claiming the benefit of the filing date of the Genius patent. (E) All of the above. 7

8 16. The following claim 2 was presented in Jones' U.S. patent application: 2. A manual shearing tool comprising a pair of epidermis depressing bars with cutting elements, said bars being juxtaposed with respect to each other, a connecting means for maintaining said bars substantially parallel to each other, and means for effecting relative movement between said bars and thereby producing a shearing action between said cutting elements. You want to rewrite this claim to further define the connecting means as being a solid rivet. Which of the following amendments conforms with proper PTO practice and procedure? (A) 2. A manual shearing tool comprising a pair of epidermis depressing bars with cutting elements, said bars being juxtaposed with respect to each other, a connecting means for maintaining said bars substantially parallel to each other, said connecting means comprising a solid rivet, and means for effecting relative movement between said bars and thereby producing a shearing action between said cutting elements. (B) 2. A manual shearing tool comprising a pair of epidermis depressing bars with cutting elements, said bars being juxtaposed with respect to each other, a solid rivet, a connecting means for maintaining said bars substantially parallel to each other, and means for effecting relative movement between said bars and thereby producing a shearing action between said cutting elements. (C) 2. (Amended) A manual shearing tool comprising a pair of epidermis depressing bars with cutting elements, said bars being juxtaposed with respect to each other, a connecting means comprising a solid rivet for maintaining said bars substantially parallel to each other, and means for effecting relative movement between said bars and thereby producing a shearing action between said cutting elements. (D) 2. (Amended) A manual shearing tool comprising a pair of epidermis depressing bars with cutting elements, said bars being juxtaposed with respect to each other, a solid rivet for maintaining said bars substantially parallel to each other, and means for effecting relative movement between said bars and thereby producing a shearing action between said cutting elements. (E) 2. (Amended) A manual shearing tool comprising a pair of epidermis depressing bars with cutting elements, said bars being juxtaposed with respect to each other, a connecting means for maintaining said bars substantially parallel to each other, said connecting means comprises a solid rivet, and means for effecting relative movement between said bars and thereby producing a shearing action between said cutting elements. 8

9 17. You have canceled claims 3 and 5 and added a new claim which is dependent on rewritten claim 2 as set forth in Question 16. Which of the following amendments conforms with proper PTO practice and procedure? (A) 3. A manual shearing tool according to Claim 2 wherein said epidermis depressing bars are rectangular in shape. (B) 5. A manual shearing tool according to Claim 2 wherein said epidermis depressing bars are rectangular in shape. (C) 6. A manual shearing tool according to Claim 2 wherein said epidermis depressing bars are rectangular in shape. (D) 6. A manual shearing tool according to Claim 2 wherein said epidermis depressing bars are rectangular in shape. (E) 6. (New Claim) A manual shearing tool according to Claim 2 wherein said epidermis depressing bars are rectangular in shape. 18. A continuation-in-part application (CIP) filed under the file-wrapper-continuation procedure requires: (A) That the same inventors named in the parent application must be named in the CIP. (B) A new oath or declaration for any subject matter added and claimed by amendment. (C) The same prior art to be used as was cited in the parent application. (D) The applicant be represented by the same registered practitioner who represented the applicant in the parent application. (E) Any newly presented claims be supported under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, by the disclosure in the first application. 19. Which of the following constitutes patentable subject matter? (A) A method of printing a business form. (B) A method utilizing a new scientific principle. (C) A process of purifying a naturally occurring element. (D) A process useful solely in the production of atomic energy for radiation treatment of tumors. (E) All of the above. 20. Which of the following is open to the public for inspection and copying? (A) A terminated interference proceeding involving an issued patent and a pending patent application. (B) A continuation-in-part application of an issued patent. (C) All abandoned patent applications. (D) All pending patent applications. (E) All assignment records relating to pending patent applications. 9

10 21. Phil files a utility application disclosing a washing machine. Claims 1-4 are drawn to a hinge for the lid of the machine, claims 5-7 are drawn to a lid for the machine, and claims 8-12 are drawn to the top frame of the machine supporting the hinged lid. The examiner required restriction between the respective inventions defined by the three groups of claims: Group I - the hinge (claims 1-4), Group II - the lid (claims 5-7) and Group III - the top frame (claims 8-12). Group I was elected for prosecution without traverse. First and second divisional applications were filed for the inventions defined by Groups II and III, respectively. The first divisional application as filed included new claims drawn to the hinge. Phil's original patent application issued as a patent. The claims to the hinge in the first divisional application contained more structural detail than the hinge claimed in Phil's patent. The original application was allowed on the first action with no changes to the original claims 1-4. At the time the original application was allowed, all three applications were copending. The examiner has rejected the hinge claims in the first divisional application over Phil's patent in view of a patent to Smith on the grounds of the judicially created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting. Given only the facts set forth above, can you overcome the rejection? (A) No, because the double patenting rejection is proper under 35 U.S.C (B) No, because Phil elected the claims drawn to the hinge without traverse. (C) No, because Phil, by original presentation of the hinge claims in the original parent application, is precluded from claiming the hinge in any divisional application in view of the restriction requirement made by the examiner. (D) Yes, because the double patenting rejection cannot properly include Smith. (E) Yes, because a terminal disclaimer can be filed to overcome the rejection. 22. On June 1, 1993, you filed an international (PCT) patent application on behalf of your client, a U.S. resident and national, who wanted to reserve his options for the future as to what countries to designate. You advised your client that she could designate all PCT member countries for the payment of 10 designation fees. However, your client wanted to conserve funds, so you followed her instructions and filed a PCT application in which only Canada, the EPO, Norway, Finland, Japan and the Republic of Korea were specifically designated. It is now 16 months from the priority date, and your client wants to add Australia and New Zealand. What should you do? (A) Nothing. No additional countries can be designated. (B) File a PCT application in Australia and designate Australia and New Zealand. (C) Confirm the precautionary designations of Australia and New Zealand immediately and pay the additional designation and confirmation fees. (D) Petition the Commissioner that there has been a mistake in failing to name Australia and New Zealand and request that your client be permitted to add these countries. (E) File an amendment canceling the designation of Finland and Norway, and add Australia and New Zealand. 23. On September 9, 1993, you filed in the PTO a patent application with a cover letter. The patent application you filed included a proper specification, one claim, a proper drawing, and an oath correctly naming the four joint inventors, Larry, Mo, Curly and Joe. However, the oath has been executed by only two of the four named inventors, namely Larry and Joe, because you were unable to.reach Mo and Curly. After filin'g the application, you discovered that your cover letter referred only to the first named inventor, Larry, with the words "et al." after his name. Given only the facts set forth above, which of 10

11 the following, if any, would be the proper course of action in order to comply with 37 CFR 1.45? (A) File a continuation-in-part application naming all four inventors. (B) File a new oath naming all four inventors, but executed by the two inventors who did not sign the original oath, along with a surcharge. (C) File a preliminary amendment canceling the "et al." in your cover letter and adding the names of the other three inventors. (D) Petition the Commissioner to correct the misjoinder of inventors and delete the two inventors who did not sign the original oath. (E) None of the above. 24. On June 17, 1993, you filed a design patent application on behalf of your client. The design depicts a lamp base comprising a lion standing on top of an automobile. The examiner rejected the design under 35 U.S.C To establish the obviousness of your client's design, the examiner relied upon a sketch from a catalog and a photograph. The sketch was in a catalog which was published on November 19, The sketch shows a lamp base design depicting only an automobile. The automobile is substantially similar to the automobile in applicant's lamp base design. The photograph was published on April 6, It shows a lamp base configured as a lion standing on a boat. In his rejection, the examiner states that "it would have been obvious to a designer having ordinary skill to modify the lamp base design shown in the sketch to incorporate therein the feature of a lion standing on the automobile in view of the design shown in the photograph." Which of the following would be your most pertinent argument in favor of patentability? (A) A photograph of an object is not a proper reference in rejecting a design under 35 U.S. C (B) A sketch from a catalog and a photograph are nonanalogous references, and therefore have been improperly combined. (C) Design practice permits only a single reference in a rejection of a claimed design under 35 u.s.c (D) A reference has not been applied showing a lamp base in existence having design characteristics which are basically the same as in the client's design. (E) A sketch from a catalog is not a proper showing of prior art, and therefore cannot be relied upon in a rejection. 25. Fred and Fran work for the same company, APC Inc. Fred invented a new composition which is electrically conductive. Fran working alone and with no knowledge of Fred's work, invented a new lubricating composition. A patent application is prepared naming both Fred and Fran as joint inventors and disclosing the new compositions. There are two claims in the application: claim 1 covers Fred's electrically conductive composition and claim 2 is directed to Fran's lubricating composition. Fred and Fran be joined as joint inventors because (A) can.. they were employed by the same company at the time the inventions were made. (B) can.. the inventions are not separate and distinct. (C) cannot.. they did not physically work together at the same time. (D) cannot.. there must be some collaboration between Fred and Fran. (E) cannot.. each did not make a contribution to the subject matter of every claim of the patent. 11

12 26. Your client, Ace Motor, has requested that you file a request for reexamination of a patent that issued on September 11, 1990 to Ace Motor's main competitor, Star Motor. Ace Motor has obtained evidence that the best mode contemplated by the inventor for carrying out the invention was not disclosed in the patent. Given only the facts above, it to file a request for reexamination (A) would be proper.. because the request can be filed at any time during the period of enforceability of the patent. (B) would be proper.. if the request includes a showing that the best mode directly relates to one of the patent claims. (C) would not be proper.. because Ace Motor can file a request for reissue alleging that the claims are wholly invalid. (D) would not be proper.. because the request must be filed during the first two years following the issue date of the patent. (E) would not be proper.. because the failure to disclose the best mode is not a question of patentability for which reexamination will be ordered. 27. Your client's invention is an automatic transm1ss1on for an automobile. Claim 1, the only independent claim in your client's application, requires that the automatic transmission have "A check valve and a spring biasing the check valve to its closed position". In rejecting independent claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b), the examiner has applied a U.S. patent to Jones. The Jones patent expressly states that it is an object of the invention to provide an automatic transmission with a check valve. There is no disclosure in the patent specification which suggests combining a check valve with a spring. However, the Jones patent shows in Figures 1, 2, and 4, a check valve and a spring biasing the check valve to its closed position. The two claims in the Jones patent claim a check valve, but neither claim sets forth language claiming a spring to bias the valve to its closed position. Which of the following arguments, if any, would overcome the rejection? (A) The Jones patent does not anticipate the claimed invention because the lack of the recital of a spring in the claims reflect the absence of intent on the part of the patentee to cover the combination of a check valve and a spring. (B) The Jones patent is not anticipatory because one having ordinary skill in the art would have found it obvious under 35 U.S.C. 103 that the spring is not part of the teaching of the reference, assessed as a whole. (C) The drawings in the Jones patent cannot supplement what is not present in the specification of the patent, and therefore the Jones patent does not anticipate claim 1. (D) Since no stated object of the invention of the Jones patent is to derive a benefit from an automatic transmission having a check valve and a spring biasing the check valve to its closed position, the patent cannot be viewed as a proper reference teaching the invention of claim 1. (E) None of the above. 28. Before a valid plant patent can be issued, the inventor of a distinct and new variety of plant must do which of the following? (A) Grow the plant from seed. (B) Asexually reproduce the plant. 12

13 (C) Furnish a specimen of the plant to the PTO. (D) Furnish drawings which include reference numerals. (E) All of the above. 29. Mary and John worked together to develop an improved resin. Mary alone discovered that a resin formed by combining components A and B gave unexpected properties. John alone discovered that, by adding C to Mary's combination, a resin was produced which had a superior property to the resin produced by Mary. You filed a patent application in which Mary and John were named as joint inventors. Claim 1 claimed a resin from A and B, while Claim 2 claimed a resin from A, B, and C. Both claims were written in independent form. The examiner, before acting on the merits, made a restriction requirement. The inventors elected Claim 1 without traverse and canceled Claim 2. Mary and John must: (A) File a certificate of correction if and when the application issues as a patent to correct inventorship. (B) Be diligent in filing an amendment to delete John from the application and include a proper petition and the appropriate fee. (C) Do nothing until inventorship is challenged in court and then request a correction. (D) Do nothing until a divisional application is filed covering the subject matter of claim 2. (E) Do nothing since Mary and John worked together in the same laboratory. 30. AQZ Technologies has established itself as a leader in the development and sale of laser etching devices. AQZ has achieved its preeminent status through constant technological innovation and an aggressive patent prosecution strategy. You are a patent agent in a law finn. The law firm has represented AQZ continuously for the past six years in a variety of legal matters. You have prosecuted a number of patent applications on behalf of AQZ's two top inventors, Davis and Lindy. You have learned that Davis and Lindy are planning to leave AQZ to form their own laser etching venture and to directly compete with AQZ. When you ask Davis and Lindy about their plans, they confirm to you that they are indeed considering such a venture. They ask if you would represent them in their new venture. You verbally decline, explaining that AQZ is your client, and that there may be conflicts of interest between them and AQZ, and warn them that any discussions with them are not privileged. You advise them to obtain counsel of their own choice. After declining, they tell you that they are planning to take with them the technology that they had been developing at AQZ, even though they know that this would clearly violate the employment agreements they had previously executed with AQZ. They ask you to keep this information secret and in confidence. Can you disclose to AQZ the information revealed to you by Davis and Lindy? (A) No, because you have established an attorney-client relationship with Davis and Lindy which requires that you maintain any information disclosed to you about the venture in secret. (B) No, because Davis and Lindy have asked you not to disclose any information they have revealed to you. (C) No, since your representation of AQZ and your consultation with Davis and Lindy represents a present actual conflict of interest of multiple clients. (D) Yes, because you represent the interests of AQZ. (E) Yes, but only after you get the consent of Davis and Lindy to disclose their plans to AQZ. 13

14 31. Which one of the following statements is true regarding practice before the PTO? (A) A preliminary amendment adding subject matter to the specification filed with a patent application and inventor executed declaration on the same day the application is filed in the PTO becomes part of the original disclosure of the application. (B) An amendment filed after a final rejection is entered as a matter of right. (C) After a second rejection of some of the claims in a non-final Office action, an appeal may be taken to the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. (D) A request for an interview requires advance written notice and payment of a $50 fee. (E) A deposit account must have a minimum balance of $100 for payment of PTO fees. 32. You are prosecuting a patent application in Examining Group 5500 for a widget on behalf of Smith. The examiner rejected all of the claims in the application as being obvious over prior art which the examiner found in his search. While preparing a response to the examiner's rejection, Smith gives you confidential proprietary information regarding commercial success which you believe will clearly help you in establishing patentability of the invention. Smith wants to maintain the information confidential, but gives permission to disclose it to the PTO if it will secure allowance of the claims in his application. You prepare your response and present arguments for patentability relying solely on the proprietary information Smith has provided to you. The information is. not required to be disclosed to the PTO under 37 CFR You comply with all of the PTO requirements for submitting proprietary information, and you hand carry the response with the proprietary information to the Director of Examining Group How will the information be handled in the PTO? (A) The examiner will make the information of record in the application file and the information will not be given any special status. (B) The envelope will be maintained in the Security Group 2200 and will be returned to Smith if the application becomes abandoned. (C) The face of the application file will be marked as containing proprietary information and it will be made part of the file history, and the information will be made available to the public only if the patent issues. (D) Whether or not the information is found to be material by the examiner, the information can always be returned to Smith after prosecution is closed by simply filing of a petition to expunge. (E) If the examiner determines that the proprietary information is important to a reasonable examiner in deciding whether to allow the application, the information will be made of record in the application file. 33. Smith, while an employee of LMN Company, filed a first application in the PTO on July 16, 1991 and assigned it to LMN. In December 1991, Smith changed employers and began employment with XYZ Company. On May 18, 1992, Smith, while an employee of XYZ Company, made an improvement over the invention claimed in the first application, filed a second application in the PTO, and assigned this later filed application to XYZ. Both assignments were recorded in the PTO. You are representing XYZ and receive an Office action in which the claims of the second application have been rejected over the claims of the first application on the ground of obviousness-type double patenting. You have copies of both of Smith's applications. Assuming that you do not consider the improvement to be obvious, what would be a proper response to the obviousness-type double patenting rejection? 14

15 (A) File a Terminal Disclaimer signed by an appropriate officer of XYZ Corporation in order to overcome the obviousness-type double patenting rejection. (B) File an Amendment or Request for Reconsideration with arguments that the claims of the second application would not have been obvious over the claims of the first application. (C) Argue that the rejection is improper because the filing dates of the two applications are less than one year apart, and therefore only an interference would be an appropriate action by the examiner. (D) Submit an affidavit or declaration stating that Smith is no longer employed by LMN Company and therefore the rejection is improper. (E) Submit an affidavit or declaration showing that the invention claimed in the second application was reduced to practice before the filing date of the first application. 34. A U.S. patent was issued on June 11, 1991 to inventor Adam. Adam gives an nonexclusive license to Acme Company to exclude others from using or selling his patented invention throughout the United States. The license agreement is recorded in the PTO on March 30, Acme discovered an error in the patent which would render the patent claims invalid. If a reissue application is filed on July 14, 1993 narrowing the Adam's original patent claims, the reissue oath (A) must be signed and sworn to by Adam and accompanied by the written assent of Acme Company. (B) may be signed and sworn to by Adam or by Acme Company. (C) must be signed and sworn to by Acme Company. (D) may be signed and sworn to by Adam, but must be accompanied by the written assent of Acme Company. (E) must be signed and sworn to by Admn. 35. You are prosecuting a patent application filed on behalf of Johnson. You received an Office action dated June 14, 1993 in which the examiner rejected all of the claims in the application under 35 U.S.C. 112 for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the invention. The examiner set a three mon.th shortened statutory period for response. After receiving the Office action, you discovered a recently issued patent which you believe discloses and claims Johnson's invention. On July 26, 1993, you filed an amendment directed solely to copying some of the claims of the patent for the purpose of provoking an interference. In an Office action dated August 9, 1993, the examiner rejected the copied claims under 35 U.S.C. 112 as being based on a non-enabling disclosure and set a three month shortened statutory period for response. If no petitions for extensions of time are filed, which of the. following, if any, would be the last date that a timely response to the Office action dated June 14, 1993 can be filed? (A) Tuesday, September 14, 1993 (B) Monday, September 27, 1993 (C) Tuesday, October 26, 1993 (D) Tuesday, November 9, 1993 (E) None of the above. 15

16 36. You have prepared a patent application on behalf of your client, Jackson. With all the final revisions and changes made, you are now ready to have Jackson sign the oath. The oath states that Jackson is the sole inventor and identifies his residence and country of citizenship. The specification is identified in the oath. In addition, the oath states that Jackson has reviewed and understands the contents of the specification, including the claims, and that Jackson believes that he is the original inventor of the subject matter which is claimed and for which a patent is sought. You filed the patent application and the oath in the PTO. Shortly thereafter, you receive a notice from the PTO that the oath is incomplete. Why is the oath incomplete? (A) The oath did not identify the claims which Jackson believes to be patentable. (B) The oath did not include a statement that you had been given the power of attorney to prosecute the application and it did not include your registration number. (C) The oath did not include a statement that Jackson acknowledges his duty to disclose to the PTO all information known to him to be material to the patentability of the invention as defined in 37 CFR (D) The oath did not include a correspondence address required by 37 CFR (E) The oath did not include your docket number for the application. 37. Consider the following three statements: I. When an invention relates to a composition of matter, the Commissioner may require the applicant to furnish ingredients for that composition of matter for the purpose of experimentation. II. A patent application, which includes a computer program listing which is less than 10 printed pages, may be submitted as drawings, provided the drawings comply with 37 CFR III. A specimen submitted with an application which has become abandoned may be returned to the applicant upon request of the applicant and at the expense of the applicant, unless it be deemed necessary that the specimen be preserved in the PTO. Which of the following best characterizes the statements set forth above: (A) Statement I is true, statement II is false, and statement III is true. (B) Statement I is true, statement II is true, and statement III is true. (C) Statement I is false, statement II is false, and statement III is false. (D) Statement I is false, statement II is true, and statement III is true. (E) Statement I is true, statement II is false, and statement III is false. 38. Smith, a resident of Dayton, Ohio, believed that plastic J-shaped guides would work as effective guides for a drawer. On December 23, 1991, Smith made several sets of plastic J-shaped guides. After making the guides, he was not sure that they would work as he had envisioned because the drawer could possibly jump the guide. On December 29, 1991, while on vacation at his brother's house in Montreal, Canada, Smith installed his plastic guides to drawers of a filing cabinet and discovered that they did work effectively as guides for a drawer. On May 29, 1992, an application with five claims was filed in the PTO by Smith with the claims drawn exclusively to the J-shaped plastic guide. In the first Office action dated August 10, 1993, the examiner rejected all of Smith's claims as being obvious over a patent 16

17 to Jones. The Jones patent was filed on April 10, 1992, and issued on June 15, The patent discloses a computer workstation arrangement which includes a cart on wheels having slide out drawers for holding a computer, a monitor, and a printer. The slide out drawers are mounted by V -shaped plastic guides. All of the claims of the patent are drawn to the entire workstation arrangement including the slide out drawers. However, the claims do not specifically set forth the V -shaped plastic guides. Which of the following would be the most appropriate response to the rejection? (A) Argue that the claimed J-shaped plastic guide of Smith would not have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art from the teaching of Jones. (B) Copy the broadest claim from the Jones patent to provoke an interference. (C) File a declaration setting forth the facts showing completion of the invention by Smith in Montreal before the filing date of the Jones patent. (D) Argue that the Jones patent is directed to non-analogous art relative to the invention claimed in Smith's application. (E) Acknowledge that Jones has priority and abandon the application. 39. You have received a restriction requirement for an application you are prosecuting. The application contains 10 claims. The requirement identified claims 1-5 as Group I which are drawn to a first invention and claims 6-10 as Group ll which are drawn to a second invention. You elect the claims of Group I with traverse and provide reasons for your traversal. Thereafter, you received a first action on the merits. Two dependent claims of Group I were objected to as being improper multiple dependent claims. The remaining claims in Group I were indicated by the examiner as being allowable. None of the claims were rejected. The examiner made the restriction requirement final. Upon receiving the Office action, you immediately filed a petition to have the restriction requirement reviewed. Given only the facts set forth above, which of the following would be a proper response to the Office action? (A) Before filing a response to the Office action, wait for a decision on the petition. (B) File a timely response and request that the response to objections be held in abeyance. (C) File a timely letter to the examiner requesting that a response to the Office be held in abeyance pending a decision on the petition. (D) File a timely response correcting all objections made by the examiner in the Office action. (E) File a timely response canceling claims A patent specification can be altered by hand written interlineation before it is filed in the PTO.. Such alterations are permitted if each interlineation is initialed and dated by the (A) applicant at any time after the oath or declaration is signed. (B) registered practitioner who prepared the specification before the oath or declaration is signed by the applicant. (C) applicant before the oath or declaration is signed by the registered practitioner. (D) registered practitioner who prepared the specification even if the applicant is available to sign the oath or declaration. (E) applicant before the oath or declaration is signed by the applicant. 17

18 41. You are prosecuting a patent application for XYZ Corporation in the PTO. You filed a petition with the appropriate petition fee to suspend action in the application. The petition sets forth good and sufficient cause for suspending action for a reasonable period of time, the cause not being due to any fault of the PTO. If, at the time the petition is filed, there is an outstanding Office action which requires a response in the application, the petition to suspend action will be: (A) Granted and the Office action will be suspended. (B) Granted and the Office action will be vacated. (C) Denied because there is an outstanding Office action. (D) Denied because applicant does not have the right to request suspension of action in an application. (E) Denied because the patent statutes do not provide for suspension of action in a patent application. 42. A deposit account may be opened by a practitioner as a convenience to charge fees. However, a general authorization to charge all fees to the deposit account will not apply to: (A) Issue fees. (B) Reissue application filing fees. (C) Extension of time fees. (D) Assignment recording fees. (E) Multiple dependent claim fees. 43. To read more information off CD-Roms, the Laser Corporation had a team working on the "blue light" project. The team included two researchers, Blue and Control. Blue invented an electrical circuit which emitted a blue laser light. On May 5, 1993, a patent application disclosing and clai~ing the electrical circuit for producing the blue laser light was filed in the PTO. Control, using the new blue laser light circuitry developed by Blue, devised a control circuit for controlling laser light. On August 5, 1993, an application was filed on behalf of Control disclosing and claiming the control circuit in combination with the blue laser light circuit. The examiner rejected all of the claims in Control's patent application as being obvious over the prior invention of Blue in view of a patent to Smith which issued in Smith discloses the same control circuit devised by Control, but in combination with a circuit producing red laser light. Blue's application does not disclose Control's claimed control blue laser light circuit. Also Blue's invention is classified in a separate and distinct class from Control's electrical control circuit. At the time of the rejection, Blue and Control had assigned their applications to Laser Corporation, and the assignments had been recorded in the PTO. Can the rejection be avoided? (A) No, because the blue laser light circuit is a crucial element of Control's control circuit. (B) No, because the Laser Corporation elected to only have one patent application on the blue laser light concept. (C) Yes, because the subject matter developed by Blue and Control is commonly owned. (D) Yes, because Blue's application does not teach Control's claimed control blue light laser circuit. (E) Yes, because Blue's invention is classified in a separate and distinct class from Control's electrical control circuit, and thus, the inventions are patentably distinct. 18

19 44. Which of th1 Jllowing statements, if any, is true? (A) An independent claim 1 for an "article comprising a widget having a coating from 0.05 to 1 mm thickness," and a dependent claim 2 for "an article according to claim 1 wherein the coating is about 0.3 mm thick," both are anticipated by "a widget having a coating of 0.5 mm thickness" described in a printed publication. (B) A claim for a "nickel alloy comprising nickel, chromium, iron and at least one member selected from the group consisting of copper, silver and tin" is anticipated by a printed publication which discloses "an alloy consisting of nickel, silver, chromium, iron, copper, and cobalt". (C) A claim for a "a laminate circuit material comprising a sheet of adhesive film, and a sheet of conductive material disposed on said sheet of adhesive film" is not anticipated by an article of manufacture consisting of an adhesive film disposed on one surface of a sheet of conductive material and a glass reinforced adhesive film disposed on the opposite surface of said sheet of conductive material. (D) A claim for a "soap composition comprising a maximum of 0.2 parts by weight of X per part by weight of Y" is anticipated by a soap composition disclosed in a publication as having 5 parts by weight of X per part weight of Y. (E) None of the above. 45. A pateo.t application filed in the PTO has 10 claims. Claims 1, 2 and 3 are independent claims directed to a product. Claim 4 is an independent claim directed to a process of making the product. Which of the following would be an acceptable form for a dependent claim 5 as originally filed? (A) A product as claimed in claims 1-3, wherein... (B) A product as claimed in claims 1, 2 and 3, wherein... (C) A product as claimed in claim 1 and 2 or claims 3 and 4, wherein... (D) A product as claimed in claim 6 or 7, wherein... (E) A product as claimed in any one of claims 1, 2, or 3 wherein Joe Hipster designed a mood ring. He filed a design application with two figures showing the top view and the side view. The application as filed includes two claims, a proper oath and the proper filing fee. Claim 1 reads "An ornamental design for a mood ring as shown in Figure 1." and claim 2 reads "An ornamental design for a mood ring as shown in Figure 2".. Assume that the design is novel and unobvious and that the drawings properly use shading to show the character and contour of the surfaces of the mood ring. Should the application be allowed by the examiner? (A) Yes, because rings are a statutory class of ornamental subject matter which can be claimed in a design patent application even though the ring has a utilitarian function to indicate the wearer's mood. (B) Yes, because the design is ornamental as well as being novel and unobvious. (C) Yes, because the surface shading is used in the drawings to show the character or contour of the surfaces represented. (D) No, because Hipster has presented two claims. (E) No, because mood rings are a fad and do not constitute patentable subject matter. 19

20 47. Barney ~="iled a patent application for a lifting device which disclosed and claimed a "fluid cylinder" as an actuating means. In a first Office action, the examiner rejected all of the claims over prior art. In a response to overcome the prior art rejection, Barney amended the specification and claims to state that the cylinder is a "pneumatic cylinder". In the next Office action, the examiner objected to the amendment to the specification as containing new matter and required cancellation thereof. The examiner also rejected the claims under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as being based upon a specification which, as originally filed, failed to provide for descriptive support for the invention now being claimed and made the Office action final. Barney, believes that the terminology, "fluid cylinder", in the original specification provides adequate support for the limitation of a "pneumatic cylinder". Which of the following, if any, would be the proper procedure to seek review of the examiner's action? (A') File an appeal of the examiner's rejection. (B) File a petition to the Commissioner seeking review of the examiner's requirement for cancellation of the amendment to the specification. (C) File a petition to the Commissioner seeking review of the examiner's rejection of the claims. (D) File a request for reconsideration with the examiner arguing that the statutory basis for the rejec.tion is incorrect and should have been 35 U.S.C (E) None of the above. 48. On Monday, January 4, 1993, you filed a complete patent application in the PTO on behalf of your client, Jones. The application disclosed and claimed a widget. Jones is self-employed and a U.S. citizen. He was living in France at the time he conceived and reduced his invention to practice. He conceived the idea for the widget on Thursday, December 12, 1991 and reduced it to practice on the same date. On Friday, December 27, 1991, Jones disclosed his invention to Smith, an American newspaper journalist, also living in France. A newspaper article by Smith was published in Paris, France on Wednesday, January 1, The article disclosed in full detail how to make and use Jones' claimed widget. Prior to publication, Smith obtained Jones' permission to publish the article. Based only on the facts set forth above, which, if any, of the sections or sections of the patent statute would the newspaper article be available as a reference against the claims drawn to the widget? (A) 35 U.S.C. 102(a) (B) 35 U.S.C. 102(b) (C) 35 U.S.C. 102(a) and (b) (D) 35 U.S.C. 102(b) and 103 (E) None of the above. 49. An inventor consulted you this morning about filing a patent application on an invention he conceived and reduced to practice in the garage of his home in Reno, Nevada. He is president of his own company, Smith Manufacturing Co., which employs 470 full-time employees, 20 part-time employees and over 50 temporary employees. The company does not have any affiliates. Over the last fiscal year, the number and types of employees has not changed. The inventor tells you that he has not assigned, granted, conveyed or licensed his invention and that he is under no obligation under contract or law to assign, grant, convey or license any rights in his invention to any person or to any business concern, or non-profit organization, including his own company. Given the facts set forth above, is the inventor entitled to small entity status? 20

21 (A) No, because the inventor made the invention in his garage. (B) No, because the total number of employees of all types at Smith Manufacturing Co. exceeds 500. (C) No, because the inventor, as president, has a fiduciary duty to assign his invention to Smith Manufacturing Company which will not qualify for small entity status. (D) Yes, because the inventor is an independent inventor. (E) Yes, because the number of full-time and part-time employees at Smith Manufacturing Company does not exceed You are prosecuting a patent application for Jones. The application contains a small entity statement signed by Jones. You received an Office action dated June 9, 1993, in which the examiner rejected all of the claims in the application and set a three month shortened statutory period for response. You are filing a response today, October 13, 1993, and have included the following paragraph petitioning for an extension of time at the beginning of your remarks: "The applicant herewith petitions the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks to extend the time for response to the Office action dated June 9, 1993 for 2 months from September 9, 1993 to November 9, Submitted herewith is a check for $ The petition for extension of time would be (A) proper because no particular format is required. (B) improper because an extension cannot be granted up to November 9, 1993 if the response is being filed today, October 13, (C) insufficient because it does not provide a reason for requesting the additional time. (D) improper because it must be in a paper separate and apart from the response to the Office action. (E) insufficient because extension of time fees cannot be paid by check. End of the Morning Section of the Examination 21

22 Test Number 014A Test Series 293 NAME U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATIONEXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS October 13, 1993 Afternoon Section (100 Points) Time: 3 Hours DIRECTIONS This section of the examination is an open book examination. You may use books, notes, or other written materials that you believe will beofhelp to you except you may not use prior registration examination questions and/or answers. Books, notes or other written materials containing prior registration examination questions and/or answers cannot be brought into or used in the room where this examination is being administered. If you have such materials, you must give them to the test administrator before this examination begins. This Section of the examination consists of 1WO (2) PARTS. Part I is worth 60 points and is directed to drafting a single independent claim and two dependent claims. You must write your answer to Part I in the Answer Book provided by the test administrator. The indeptendent claim is worth 40 points and each dependent claim is worth 10 points. Part II is worth 40 points and is directed to an appeal of a fmal rejection to the Board ofpatentappeals and Interferences. Part II has eight (8) multiple choice questions, each worth five (5) points. Part II includes a YELLOW SUPPLEMENT which must be removed from this test booklet before beginning the examination. DO NOT REMOVE THE SUPPLEMENT until you are instructed to do so by the test administrator. All answers to the questions in Part II must be recorded in SECTION 1 of the Answer Sheet which is provided to you by the test administrator. You must use a No.2 (or softer) lead pencil to record your answers on the Answer Sheet. Darken completely the circ!ecorresponding to your answer. You must keep your mark within the circle. Erase completely all marks except your answer. Stray marks may be counted as answers. No points will be awarded for incorrect answers or unanswered questions. Questions answered by darkening inore than one circle will be considered as being incorrectly answered. Your answers must conform to the policy, practice and procedure which must, shall or should be followed in accordance with the patent statutes, PTO rules ofpracticeand procedure, and the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP). Do not assume any additional facts not given in the questions. Where reference is made in this test booklet to "USPTO","PTO" or "Office", it will mean the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Unless otherwise stated, when answering the questions assume that you are a registered patent agent You may write anywhere on this examination booklet. Apart from the YELLOW SUPPLEMENT, do not remove any pages from the booklet. Only answers recorded in your Answer Book and on your Answer Sheet will be graded. YOU MUST OBTAIN A SCORE OF AT LEAST 70 POINTS TO PASS THIS SECTION OF TilE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION. DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE INSTRUCTED TO CHECK THE CO.'~TENTS OF THIS EXAMINATION BOOKLET OR TO BEGIN THE EXAMINATION 1

23 PART I (60 Points) DIRECTIONS: This part is directed to claim drafting and consists of three options: chemical, mechanical and electrical. The chemical option below is directed to a thermal transfer recording sheet, the mechanical option (on page 5) is directed to a shaving implement and the electrical option (on page 9) is directed to a signal circuit for incoming telephone calls. You must select one of the options. If you select more than one option, only the first option presented in your Answer Book will be graded. The directions for each option follow the fact pattern for each option. CHEMICAL OPTION: Thermal Transfer Recording Sheet It is known that a printer having a thermal head prints clear color images by thermal transfer of a thermomelting ink or a sublimating dye onto a thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet The evenness and clarity of the color images are influenced by the quality of the substrate and the image receiving layer of the recording sheet. OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION A principal object of the invention is to provide a thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet having excellent clarity, high resolution, and high reproductivity. A further object of the invention is to provide a thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet having a Bekk surface smoothness of at least 200 seconds. Still another object of the invention is to provide a thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet which is free from heat shrinkage or deformation when images are imprinted using a sublimating dye. The thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet according to the invention is capable of receiving superposed color images of thermally transferred yellow, magenta, cyan and/or black color at a resolution of 16 to 32 dots/mm. To achieve the objects, it is necessary that the surface of the thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet have excellent properties and smoothness. Improved smoothness of the recording sheet is achieved when the thickness of the image receiving layer is 80 to 150 pm. The surface smoothness of the thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet is influenced by the surface properties and surface smoothness of the sheet substrate. DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION ' The thermal transfer:image receiving recording sheet of this invention is illustrated in FIG. 1 below. The recording sheet 1 includes a sheet substrate 2 and an image receiving layer 3 on a surface of the sheet substrate. The opposite surface of the sheet substrate 2 has a back coating layer 4 having an outer surface 5. 1 r- 3 FIG

24 The sheet substrate used in the invention is a paper sheet formed by mixing a low viscosity pulp having a viscosity of 5 to 20 centipoises with an ordinary pulp material. If the viscosity of the low viscosity pulp is less than 5 centipoises, a sheet substrate will be produced having unsatisfactory mechanical strength. If the viscosity of the low viscosity pulp is more than 20 centipoises, a sheet substrate will be produced having unsatisfactory surface smoothness and reduced evenness of color images on the surface. Preferably, the low viscosity pulp has a viscosity of 8 to 12 centipoises. The amount of low viscosity pulp in the mixture is 10 to 70% by weight of the total pulp (both the low viscosity pulp and the ordinary pulp material) of the sheet substrate. If the low viscosity pulp is less than 10% by weight of the total pulp, the resultant substrate sheet exhibits unsatisfactory surface smoothness. If the low viscosity pulp is more than 70% by weight of the total pulp, the sheet substrate begins to exhibit unsatisfactory lowered mechanical strength. A sheet substrate with unsatisfactory lowered mechanical strength or unsatisfactory surface smoothness and reduced evenness of color images does not meet the objects of the invention. As the low viscosity pulp is mixed with ordinary pulp material, one or more additives may optionally be added to the mixture. The mixture of low viscosity pulp and ordinary pulp is dispersed in water to form a resultant pulp slurry. The ph of the pulp slurry is maintained at 7.0. The additives include fillers (e.g. clay, kaolin, or calcium carbonate), fixing agents (e.g. aluminum sulfate or aluminum chloride), starch, pigments, dyes, and brightening agents. In the most preferred embodiment of the invention, cooked or solubilized potato starch is dispersed in the pulp by mixing the pulp slurry with the starch. The starch serves primarily to glue down loose fibers which might otherwise project from the paper sheet. The pulp slurry is converted to a paper sheet using a wirepaper machine in the conventional manner. A sizing agent (e.g. fatty acid salt or rosin) is applied to both surfaces of the paper sheet. Then the paper sheet is compressed using a calendar to increase the surface smoothness of the paper sheet. The resultant paper sheet is used as a sheet substrate. The image receiving layer 3 is disposed on a surface of the sheet substrate by melt-extruding a coating of a resin on the sheet substrate. The only resins found suitable for the image receiving layer are homopolymers of polyethylene, polystyrene, polyurethane, polymethacrylate, and polyacrylonitrile, and a copolymer of vinyl chloride and vinyl acetate. An inorganic white p,igment is dispersed in the resin before melt-extruding the resin. The inorganic white pigment can be clay, kaolin, talc, barium sulfate, calcium carbonate, or titanium dioxide. Depending on the pigment used, the whiteness of the image receiving layer is improved. The inorganic white pigment is present in the resin in the amount of 5 to 90% by weight of the resin, preferably 50 to 85% by weight of the resin. A pigment content greater than 90% by weight produces an image receiving layer exhibiting poor resistance to cracking and adversely affects the surface smoothness of the image receiving layer. A pigment content less than 5% by weight provides an image receiving layer having uneven shading of images due to unsatisfactory opacity and whiteness. The amount by weight of the resin with the white pigment applied to the surface of the sheet substrate to form the image receiving layer is 2 to 80 g/m 2, and preferably 10 to 30 g/m 2 In the most preferred embodiment of the invention, an antistatic agent as well as the inorganic white pigment are dispersed in the resin prior to melt-extrusion of the resin. An example of an antistatic agent suitable for use in the invention is a quaternary ammonium salt or an alkyl phosphate. 3

25 The back coating layer 4 is formed by melt extruding a layer of the same resin as used for the image receivi!lg layer (without any pigment or antistatic agents) onto the surface of the sheet substrate opposite the surface coated with the image receiving layer. The amount by weight of the resin applied to the surface of the sheet substrate to form the back coating layer is 2 to 50 g/m 2, and preferably 5 to 20 g/m 2 The coated sheet substrate with the resin back coating layer is then pressed with a cooling roller. In the most preferred embodiment, the amount by weight of th~ resin applied is 5 to 20 g/m 2 and the cooling roller has a matted peripheral surface in a predetermined pattern so that the matte pattern of_ the cooling roller is transferred to the outer surface 5 of the back coating layer. AN EXAMPLE OF THE INVENTION: A pulp slurry is produced by mixing a low viscosity pulp having a viscosity of 7 centipoises, ordinary pulp, solubilized starch, and a sizing agent. The pulp slurry is converted to a paper sheet using a wirepaper machine, and the sheet is super calendared to a Bekk smoothness of 210 seconds. A polyethylene resin containing 10% by weight titanium dioxide and 0.10 % by weight of ethyl phosphate is melt extruded at an amount of 30 g/m 2 onto the sheet substrate to form an image receiving layer which is 125 pm thick. The same polyethylene resin (absent the pigment and additives) is melt extruded onto the surface of the sheet substrate opposite that coated with the image receiving layer to provide a back coating layer. The amount of resin applied to form the back coating layer is 15 g/m 2 The coated sheet substrate is pressed using a cooling roller having a matted peripheral surface in a predetermined pattern so that the matte pattern is transferred to the outer surface of the back coating layer. THE PRIOR ART The prior art includes a United States patent which issued in FIG. 2 below illustrates the thermal transfer image receiving sheet disclosed in the prior art patent. The recording sheet comprises an image receiving layer 5 comprising a polyolefin resin or a copolymer resin, a sheet substrate 2, and a matted polyolefin resin back coating layer 3. FIG. 2 The patent describes the image receiving layer 5 as being 180 to 200 pm thick with a Bekk surface smoothness of 200 seconds and as comprising polyolefin resin containing talc, the amount of talc in the resin being 10 to 15 % by weight of the resin. In a preferred embodiment, the resin is polyethylene or a copolymer of vinyl chloride and vinyl acrylate. The sheet substrate is described in the patent as made from a mixture of ordinary pulp, low viscosity pulp, and cellulose. The low viscosity pulp is described as constituting 50 to 85% by weight of the pulp material, and as having a viscosity of 16 to 24 centipoises, preferably 18 centipoises. The cellulose is described as being rice or potato starch. The patent states that a low viscosity pulp having a viscosity greater than 24 centipoises reduces the smoothness of the image receiving layer of the thermal transfer image receiving sheet. The patent describes the back coating layer as being polyethylene resin or a copolymer resin of vinyl chloride and vinyl acrylate in an amount of 1 to 10 g/m 2 The back coating layer 3 is matted. DIRECTIONS FOR THE CHEMICAL OPTION: Draft THREE (3) CLAIMS: a single independent generic claim and two dependent claims to a thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet as shown in Figure 1. The generic claim (claim 1) must be the broadest claim for the thermal transfer image 4

26 receiving recording sheet which defines the novelty of the invention as described above, which defines the invention as set forth in the OBJECIS OF TilE INVENTION, which includes any critical limitations, and which distinguishes the invention over the teachings of the prior art. One dependent claim (claim 2) must be for the preferred embodiment which is not anticipated by the prior art. The other dependent claim (claim 3) must cover the most preferred embodiment which is not anticipated by the prior art. The generic claim is worth 40 points and each dependent claim is worth 10 points. Your claims must be drawn to a thermal transfer image receiving recording sheet and you must adhere to the following requirements. You may not be your own lexicographer to name or rename components, chemicals, or elements of the disclosed invention. You must use the terminology of the described invention. Any composition claim, or method claim, or Jepson claim will receive no credit. Points will be deducted for (1) claiming subject matter not within the scope of the invention disclosed above, (2) using claim language which is vague or indefinite, (3) using claim language which does not have antecedent basis or which does not positively set forth each element or component, (4) reciting one or more process steps, (5) failing to interrelate or incorrectly interrelating the elements or components set forth in your claims, (6) claiming unnecessary limitations in generic claim 1, (7) presenting a claim that defines an inoperative invention or that is anticipated by the prior art, (8) using poor grammar or misspelled words, and (9) failing to follow these directions. MECHANICAL OPTION: Shaving Implement The present invention relates to a shaving implement which includes a shaving head and an improved handle assembly. The handle assembly is adapted to receive a tube of shaving cream and to dispense the cream. BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION The drawing above shows a prior art shaving implement. The implement includes a handle A that is integral with a head B. A razor F is held between the head B and a clamping portion E. The clamping portion E includes a stem D which is externally threaded at its inner free end. C indicates the bore of the handle which receives the inner free end of the stem D. A securing part G holds all of the parts together. The securing part G includes a large diameter bore with an internally threaded inner end and this threaded inner end is engaged with the externally threaded inner free end of the stem D. A very small bore M extends through the clamping portion E and its stem D and terminates within the securing part G. The bore M has an enlarged end at P at the inner free end of the stem D. A rubber tube R includes an open end and a closed end. The open end is defined by a tip Q and the closed end is defined by a collapsible bulb S. The rubber tube is, in part, positioned within the large diameter bore of the securing part G, with the tip Q received within the enlarged end P of the bore M. The bulb S is external of the securing part G. A shaving cream completely fills the tube. When the collapsible bulb S is collapsed by a user, shaving cream is dispensed through the very small bore M. 5

27 The prior art shaving implement described above has shown to be disadvantageous for a number of reasons. First, the size of the tube permits the storage of only enough shaving cream for one shave. Second, the tube cannot be completely emptied of shaving cream by collapsing the bulb. Third, because the bulb is externally positioned, it extends the length of the shaving implement and may be accidentally collapsed causing shaving cream to be inadvertently dispensed. OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION The present invention provides an improved shaving implement by overcoming the disadvantages mentioned above relative to the prior art shaving implement. The main object of the invention is to provide a shaving implement which can dispense shaving cream for the lifetime of the razor. A further object of the invention is to provide a handle having a channel with longitudinal sides and a chamber for holding a collapsible tube of shaving cream so that when a tube closure is in its open position, a tube squeezing slide, positioned in the channel and chamber of the handle, can be moved by a user to cause opposed slots of the slide to ride on the longitudinal sides of the channel such that shaving cream from the tube can be selectively dispensed from a dispensing opening in a neck of the collapsible tube. DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION FIGS. 1-3 below, depict a first embodiment of the shaving implement of the present invention ~ _ / 50 / ~ / ~ Fig.2. 6

28 The shaving implement, generally at 10, comprises an elongated handle 12 of plastic material. The handle 12 must be substantially rigid. The handle is of generally rectangular cross-section and includes a top side 6 and a bottom side 8. The handle further has at a first end an upturned portion 14 angled toward the top side 6 of the handle and an opening at a second end 38. The upturned portion 14 is connected to a shaving head 16 that includes a razor. The handle 12 is provided with a chamber 18 running the length of the handle, which is adapted to receive a collapsible tube 20 of shaving cream. Preferably, the tube 20 contains an adequate amount of shaving cream intended to last for approximately the lifetime of the razor in the shaving head 16. One end of tube 20 includes a threaded neck 22 which in turn includes a dispensing opening 24, out of which the shaving cream is dispensed. The dispensing opening is adjacent the second end 38 of the handle 12. The other end of tube 20 is a tapered end 26. The handle 12 also includes a channel 28. The channel 28 is defined by longitudinal sides 30 and is formed on and through the top side 6 of handle 12. A tube squeezing slide 32 of resilient plastic material is movably mounted in the channel 28 and chamber 18. The slide 32 includes a pair of opposed slots 34 which snap fit onto and slidably engage or ride on the longitudinal sides 30 of the channel 28. The slide 32 further defines a downwardly depending portion 36 which is intended to engage the tapered end 26 of tube 20. It is critical in the present invention that the channel 28 communicate over substantially its entire length with the chamber 18 and that the tube substantially fills the chamber so that the slide can progressively engage and collapse the tube to expel substantially all of the shaving cream therefrom. For greater ease of the user, the tube squeezing slide 32 is provided with a series of ridges 40 to frictionally engage the thumb or finger of the user. To selectively permit dispensing of shaving cream, an openable tube closure is connected to the threaded neck 22 of the tube 20. The closure comprises first and second parts 42 and 44, respectively. First closure part 42 snap fits into the opening in the second end 38 of the handle 12 and comprises an interior chamber 46 that is completely enclosed except for two passages. The first passage 48 at one side of the interior chamber fits over and is axially in alignment with the neck 22 of tube 20 thereby providing a tight seal to prevent shaving cream from backing up into the chamber 18. A second passage 50 at an opposite side of the interior chamber 46 is offset relative to the axially aligned first passage 48. Second closure part 44 snap fits into first closure part 42 and is rotatably engaged therein. More particularly, second closure part 44 is rotatable 90 degrees and is provided with an angled conduit In a first position of second closure part 44, angled conduit 52 aligns with passage 50 in first closure part 42, while in a second position, when part 44 is rotated 90 degrees, angled conduit 52 is no longer aligned with second. passage 50. Thus, rotation of second closure part 44 into its first position permits dispensing of shaving cream and rotation into its second position prevents dispensing of shaving cream. To assemble the shaving implement, the collapsible tube 20 is inserted into the chamber 18 through the opening in the second end 38 of the handle 12. The tube squeezing slide 32 is then snapped into place in the channel 28 and the chamber 18 near the upturned portion 14. The closure part 42, with its attached rotatable closure part 44, is then snapped into the opening in the second end 38 of the handle 12. In operation, when a user rotates the closure part 44 into its first position with angled conduit 52 aligned with passage 50 as shown in FIG. 2, and then moves the squeezing slide 32 from its position near the upturned portion 14 toward the second end 38 of the handle 12, the slide progressively engages and collapses the tube 20 so that shaving cream will be dispensed through the angled conduit 52. 7

29 FIGS. 4-6 below, show a second embodiment of the shaving implement of the present invention. In this embodiment, the shaving implement is generally depicted at 110 and comprises a plastic handle 112 with an upturned portion 114 carrying a shaving head 116. The handle 112 must be substantially rigid. The cross-section of the handle is ellipsoidal. The handle 112 is also provided with a chamber. 118 having a large opening 160 at a second end 138 of the handle 112 and a smaller opening 162 at the first end of the handle near the upturned portion 114. The chamber 118 receives the collapsible shaving cream tube 20 with the threaded neck 22 of the tube extending through the smaller opening 162. A closure cap 164 is threaded on the tube neck 22 to cover the dispensing opening 24 (the closed position I of the closure cap) when dispensing of the shave cream is not desired. The handle 112 has a channel 166 which runs substantially the full length of the handle and is open at the second end 138 of handle 112. The channel, defined by longitudinal sides 130, is, over substantially its entire length, in direct communication with the chamber 118. The tube 20 substantially fills the chamber 118. A tube squeezing slide 168, made of rigid plastic, has a pair of opposed slots 170 that slidably engage or ride on the longitudinal sides 130 of the channel 166 when the slide is operationally positioned in the handle 112. The tube squeezing slide 168 is further provided with a bulbous portion 172 for engaging the tapered end 26 of tube 20. A plug 174 is snap fitted within the large opening 160 on the second end 138 of the handle 112 for retaining both the tube 20 and the slide 168 in the chamber 118. In operation, when the closure cap 164 is in its open position (removed from the tube neck 22) and does not cover the dispensing opening 24, and the slide 168 is moved along the channel, shaving cream will be dispensed through the opening 24 in the neck 22 of the tube. 8

30 DIRECTIONS FOR THE MECHANICAL OPTION: Draft THREE (3) CLAIMS: a single independent generic claim and two dependent claims to a shaving implement. The generic claim (claim 1) must be the broadest claimfor the shaving implement which defines the invention as set forth in the OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION, which includes any critical limitations, and which is not anticipated by the prior art. One dependent claim (claim 2) must cover the specific embodiment shown in FIGS. 1 through 3 and further include the relatively rotatable first and second closure parts with the cooperating interior :hamber, passages, and angled conduit. The other dependent claim (claim 3) must cover the specific embodiment shown in FIGS. 4 through 6, including handle openings, the plug, and the threaded closure cap. The generic claim is worth 40 points and each dependent claim is worth 10 points. Your claims must be drawn to a shaving implement, and you must adhere to the following requirements. You may not be your own lexici'jgrapher to name the elements or components of the disclosed invention or to rename elements or components of the shaving implement. You must use the terminology of the described invention. Any method claim or Jepson claim will receive no credit. Points will be deducted for (1) claiming subject matter not within the scope of the invention disclosed above, (2) using claim language which is vague or indefinite, (3) using claim language which does not have antecedent basis or which does not positively set forth each element or component, (4) failing to interrelate or incorrectly interrelating the elements or components set forth in your claims, (5) claiming unnecessary limitations in generic claim 1, (6) presenting a claim that defines an inoperative invention or that is anticipated by the prior art, (7) using poor grammar and misspelled words, and (8) failing to follow these directions. ELECTRICAL OPTION: Signal Circuit for Incoming Telephone Calls Conventional phones include a ringer circuit to signal persons that a telephone call is being directed to a particular telephone which should be promptly answered. In open offices, when multiple telephones ring at about the same time, the ringer bell noise both annoys and distracts workers and reduces office efficiency. Telephone bells have a standardized sound. It can be difficult to tell which telephone bell is ringing in a multi-phone office. The attention of workers near the ringing telephone is momentarily diverted until they determine that it is not their telephone that is ringing. This is unproductive. This invention provides add-on hardware and uses a computer sound program, running in the background of a multi-tasking program on a stand-alone central computer, to store a large number of sounds or melodies. The invention provides for a unique melody to be associated with each telephone signal. Prior improvements allowed hardware to be installed at each telephone which used a tape recorded melody, personally selected, as the signal. The prior art tape system has two disadvantages: (1) personally selected melodies were often currently popular songs and the same melody was often used for more than one telephone, and (2) some individuals spent a significant amount of the work-day making internal calls, just to hear other signal melodies. Offices using this invention generally rely on a large collection of melodies written before 1930 that no one knows and most dislike. Using these melodies, with a different one used for each office telephone, telephones are promptly answered and internal calls are minimized. 9

31 BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION FIG. 1 shows a conventional telephone 10 with a handset 12, a conventional dialing and speech circuit, and a ringer circuit comprising a capacitor 14 and a ringer 16. When a telephone call is directed to telephone 10, a 20 Hz ring signal is transmitted through a telephone line pair L1 and L2. The signal passes through capacitor 14 and causes ringer 16 in the ringer circuit to ring. The ring signal consists of bursts of 90 volt alternating current. Each burst lasts for two seconds. The bursts are separated by a pause lasting four seconds. When the handset 12 is lifted, hook switches SW, which are normally in an open position, close allowing a DC voltage, which is always present across the line pair L1 and L2, to produce a direct current though the dialing and speech circuit of telephone 10. The flow of this direct current is sensed at a central telephone office which interrupts the ring signal and allows normal speech across line pair L1 and L2. l1 l2 HANDSET DIAL AND SPEECH CIRCUIT * 0 # FIG FIG. 2 shows a prior art signal circuit using a tape machine 24 to play a pre-recorded melody. Using this circuit, the wire connecting the ringer circuit 16 to telephone line L2 must be disconnected so that ringer 16 remains disabled. The signal circuit illustrated in FIG. 2 is typically packaged external and adjacent to each telephone. When a ring signal is transmitted through telephone line pair L1 and L2, a capacitor 20 passes the ring signal to a ring detector 22 which activates tape machine 24 to play the pre-recorded melody. The melody is transmitted through an amplifier 26 and a speaker 28 so that it can be heard. Any pre-record melodies on a conventional audio cassette which can be inserted into tape machine 24 can be used. The tape machine is energized by a conventional decay circuit within ring detector 22 and will continue - to play between the ring bursts. The decay circuit signals the tape machine 24 to play for about 4.5 seconds after the end of each ring signal. When the handset 12 is lifted, a pair of ganged hook switches SW are closed and t}le direct current in line pair L1 and L2 flows though the dialing and speech circuit of the telephone 10. This direct current is sensed at a central telephone office which interrupts the ring signal and allows normal speech across line pair L1 and L2. The pre-recorded melody will continue to play for up to 4.5 seconds after the ring signal is interrupted. 10

32 l. 12 HANDSET FIG. 2 L1 28 l2 I~N~E~ DIAL AND SPEECH... CIRCUIT "I# 10 OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION ~ _1 The present invention provides for a signal circuit for an office telephone system having two or more telephones which will program each telephone in an office to play its own preselected melody in response to a ring signal. The main object of the invention is to provide circuit employing a computer which is coupled to each telephone through a ring detector circuit and a relay to enable a preselected signal melody to be played through an amplifier and speaker located next to or in very close proximity to each telephone or to broadcast the signal melody through an amplifier and one or more speakers located in the office. Another object of the invention is to provide DC power to the ring detector circuit from a central computer to the ring detector so that when the power to the computer is interrupted or the computer is turned off, the ringer circuit in the telephone will ring in response to a ring signal transmitted through the telephone line pair to the telephone. A further object of the invention is to provide a current detector in the signal circuit '! ith a light emitting diode and a light sensitive transistor to provide a command to turn off the preselected melody as soon as the ring signal is interrupted. DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION FIG. 3 on page 12 illustrates the circuit of the present invention. In an office having a telephone system with two or more telephones, each telephone 30P (the letter "P" designates a particular telephone in the office) has an external signal circuit including a capacitor 32P, a ring detector 34P, a solid state relay 33P, and a current detector 37P. All of the signal circuits are connected to a single computer 35. When a ring signal is received for a particular telephone, the computer automatically transmits a signal melody through an amplifier 36P to a speaker 38P which is located in close proximity to telephone 30P. Any commercially available computer sound program, which can be run on the computer, can be used to match telephone numbers to signal melodies. Generally, such programs are sold for the purpose of dubbing a personally programmed audio component in computer games. In this invention, no two telephone numbers have the same signal melody. The melodies are loaded in the computer memory by a method taught in the program instructions. The computer programmer then assigns office telephone numbers to some non-repeating part of the sequence of loaded signal melodies. 11

33 37 31P HANDSET 41 FIG. 3 sw/ DIAL AND SPEECH CIRCUIT # 30P When a ring signal to telephone 30P is transmitted through telephone line pair LPl and LP2, the capacitor 32P passes the ring signal to the ring detector 34P. The capacitor 32P and the ring detector 34P form a ring detector circuit. When the computer 35 is turned on, the ringer 16P within telephone 30P will be automatically disabled by relay 33P when a ring signal is received on telephone line pair LPl and LP2. The relay 33P is a transistor circuit on telephone line LPl. The relay 33P will function in the same way if alternatively placed on line LP2 between the ring detector and the telephone and is designed to conduct speech and dial-out signals. However, when a ring signal is sensed by the ring detector 34P, the ring detector provides a bias to the relay 33P to tum the relay off, blocking the transmission of the ring signal to the telephone. When the relay 33P is biased to tum the relay off, the telephone ringer 16P will not ring. The elapsed time required to tum the relay 33P off is less than one tenth of the time required for the telephone ringer 16P to begin to ring. The ringer 16P is not heard when the relay is turned off. A DC voltage which is always present across line pair LPl and LP2. The relay 33P has an internal bypass for the DC,voltage to reach the ganged hook switches SW. When the ring signal is sensed by the ring detector 34P, the ring detector transmits an "ON" signal to the computer 35. The computer has a large number of ports (not shown). Each port is hard wired to the ring detector of a different office telephone. This multi-port input is conventional for computers connected to a large number of telephone lines. The computer sound program takes the "ON" signal from the ring detector 34P of telephone 30P, matches it to the preselected melody for telephone 30P, and transmits the preselected signal melody through an amplifier 36P to a speaker 38P located next to or in close proximity to telephone 30P. The invention is not limited to using multiple amplifiers. Although not illustrated, a single amplifier could be used and connected to one or more speakers to broadcast the signal melodies throughout the office. When the handset 31P is lifted, the conventional ganged hook switches SW are closed, allowing the DC voltage to provide current though the dialing and speech circuit of telephone 30P. The flow of this current is sensed at a central telephone office which interrupts the ring signal, and the ring detector 34P removes the "OFF" bias to the relay 33P. This allows a path for normal speech across line pair LPl 12

34 and LP2 through the relay. The process is repeated at other telephones in the office, each telephone having its own preselected signal melody. The circuitry in the current detector 37P will instantly turn off the signal melody when the telephone handset 31P is picked up. When the handset is picked up, the ganged hook switches SW are closed causing the current detector to sense that there is direct current on the telephone line LPl. When direct current is detected, the current detector energizes a light emitting diode (LED) 39P. The light from this diode is detected by a light sensitive transistor (LST) 40P. The light sensitive transistor is connected to the computer and used as a command means to immediately terminate the corresponding signal melody from the computer. The combination of the light emitting diode and the light sensitive transistor to terminate a signal is well known and is identical to that used by the central telephone office to tum off the ring signal. The circuit, described above, disables the tintinnabulation (ringing sound of the bells) on the office telephones except when the computer is turned off. The DC power, required to operate each of the ring detectors, is tapped off the computer DC power supply 41. When the computer power supply is turned off, the ring detectors are turned off. The ring detectors, when not receiving DC power, present a high impedance to block the ring signal. The ring current will pass through the relay 33P because the relay is always on, i.e. conducting, unless there is a signal from the ring detector to turn the relay off. Thus, when the power to the computer power is interrupted or the computer is turned off, the ringer circuit in each telephone will operate as the prior art telephone illustrated in FIG. 1. DIRECI'IONS FOR THE ELECTRICAL OPTION: Draft THREE (3) CLAIMS: a single independent generic claim and two dependant claims to a signal melody office telephone system. The generic claim (claim 1) must be the broadest claim for the novel telephone system which defines the invention as set forth in the OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION, which includes any critical limitations, and which is not anticipated by the prior art. One dependent claim (claim 2) must interrelate the components which causes the telephone ringer to ring when the computer power is off. The other dependent claim (claim 3) must interrelate the components which causes the signal melodies to stop as soon as the handset is picked up. The generic claim is worth 40 points and each dependent claim is worth 10 points. Your claim must be drawn to a signal melody office telephone system and you must adhere to the following requirements. Any claim which includes the ringer circuit or the ring detector circuit must set forth every active 'component in the circuit. You may not be your own lexicographer to name or rename portions of the system that have been described above. You must use the terminology of the described invention. Any method claim or Jepson claim will receive no credit. Points will be deducted for (1) claiming subject matter not within the scope of the invention disclosed above, (2) using claim language which is vague or indefinite, (3) using claim language which does not have antecedent basis or which does not positively set forth each part or component, (4) failing to interrelate or incorrectly interrelating the claimed parts or components set forth in your claims, (5) claiming unnecessary limitations in generic claim 1, (6) presenting a claim that defines an inoperative invention or that is anticipated by the prior art, (7) using poor grammar or misspelled words, and (8) failing to follow these directions. 13

35 PART IT (40 Points) DIRECTIONS AND BACKGROUND: This part of the examination consists of 8 multiple choice questions worth five (5) points each. Unless otherwise directed, the questions are based upon the following facts and the information found in the YELLOW Supplement for Part II. On March 1, 1989, Jones invented a bottle stopper for champagne bottles. You prepared a patent application for Jones on his invention and filed it in the PTO on June 20, The application issued as Patent No. 9,999,999 on July 10, On April 7, 1991, Jones invented a threaded bottle stopper which was an improvement over his original and patented bottle stopper. The improvement is directed to a means which functions to control the release of pressurized gas from the bottle to preclude both ejection of the stopper at a dangerous velocity and undesirable premature spillage of the bottle contents. On August 8, 1991, you filed an application in the PTO on behalf of Jones disclosing and claiming the improved bottle stopper. The application for the improvement was prosecuted through final rejection. The examiner's grounds for the final rejection were stated as follows: Claims 1-3 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Miller (U.S. Patent No. 7,777,777, issued October 17, 1972). Claims 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Jones (U.S. Patent No. 9,999,999). Claim 1-4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Miller (U.S. Patent No. 7,777,777). The Miller patent discloses the bottle stopper substantially as claimed by applicant except that Miller uses two V shaped ribs or seals instead of three. The number of ribs is not critical and would have been an obvious matter of choice to one of ordinary skill in the art. You prosecuted both applications on behalf of Jones. You have appealed the examiner's final rejection of claims 1-4 and 6. Claim 5 has been indicated by the examiner as being allowable. The relevant portions of the Jones application on appeal (i.e. the specification and a clean copy of the appealed claim 1-4 and 6 and allowable claim 5) are reproduced in the YELLOW Supplement. The application included an abstract which ;.has not been reproduced. The references relied upon by the examiner in his final rejection are also set forth in the YELLOW Supplement. You have timely filed a Notice of Appeal and an Appeal Brief with the appropriate fees. In your Brief, you requested that "the rejection of claims 1-3 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Miller, the rejection of claims 1-4 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by Jones, and the rejection of claims 1-4 and 6 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as unpatentable over Miller be reversed." You did not request an oral hearing. The examiner filed his Examiner's Answer and the case is presently awaiting decision by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board). Answer the following 8 questions in SECTION 1 on your Answer Sheet, and unless otherwise directed, answer each question independently of all other questions. See the Directions on page 1 of this test booklet for instructions for recording your answers on the Answer Sheet. Each numbered question below corresponds to the numbered answer in SECTION 1 of your Answer Sheet. For each question, mark in SECTION 1 the letter you choose as your answer. If choice (E) is "None of the above", your selection of choice (E) denotes your intent not to select any of the previous choices. 14

36 1. In your Appeal Brief, you argued that the structure of the tubular body portion of the stopper defined by claim 1 includes a unique sealing means that is not disclosed or suggested in the applied prior art of record. This unique sealing means, you stated, includes an annular sealing ring 38 that is released from the annular inner surface of the bottle neck prior to the disengagement of the threaded connection between the stopper annular skirt and the exterior surface of the bottle neck. However, in its opinion, the Board stated that claim 1 did not include any stopper sealing structure on the tubular portion and sustained the anticipatory rejection of this claim. You did not request reconsideration of the Board decision, but rather submitted a proposed amendment to claim 1 as follows: 1. (Amended) A bottle stopper for containing a pressurized product within a bottle comprising a cap, said cap including a disc portion having an inner surface and an outer periphery, an annular skirt depending from said inner surface at said outer periphery, a tubular body portion depending from said inner surface of said disc portion radially inwardly of said annular skirt so as to define an annular space therebetween, said annular space being defined in part by an annular base section of said inner surface of said disc portion, said annular base section including a plurality of V-shaped seals for engaging a rim of a neck of said bottle when said neck is positioned within said annular space, said annular skirt including an inside surface having threads thereon intended to engage threads on an external surface of said neck of said bottle, and said tubular body portion including an outside surface intended to engage an inner annular surface of said neck of said bottle when said neck is received within said annular space~ said outside surface of said tubular body portion including a seal which is disengaged from said neck of said bottle prior to threaded disengagement between said annular skirt and said neck of said bottle. ' In accordance with PTO practice and procedure, the amendment (A) will be entered by the Board and the application will be passed to issue in that it is the tubular body portion structure of the stopper that is the unique aspect of the appellant's invention. (B) will be entered by the examiner as a matter of right and the application will be passed to issue because the sole independent claim 1 now differs from the prior art in the exact manner that was argued by the appellant before the Board. (C) will be entered by the examiner since the Board expressly recommended the exact amendment now propos~ by the applicant and any amendment that places the application in condition for allowance will be entered by the examiner at any time in the prosecution. (D) will not be entered unless the examiner endorses on the amendatory paper a recommendation that the amendment be admitted and th.e examiner's Group Director concurs with the recommendation. (E) will not be entered by the examiner because the claim is subject to a rejection under 35 U.S.C. 112, second paragraph, as lacking enablement. 15

37 2. Claim 5 has been indicated by the examiner as being allowable. The claim is not an original claim, but was added by amendment in response to the examiner's first Office action. The claim specifies that the "tubular body portion is flexible". In accordance with established PTO practice and procedure, the Board would (A) introduce in its decision a statement setting forth a new rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as having no descriptive basis in the specification as filed. (B) introduce in its decision a statement setting forth a new rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being obvious over the Miller patent. (C) recommend in its decision a new rejection of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) as being anticipated by the disclosure of the Miller patent. (D) recommend in its decision rejections of claim 5 under 35 U.S.C. 112, first paragraph, as having no descriptive basis in the original specification and under 35 U.S.C. 102(b), as being anticipated by Miller, and remand the application to the examiner. (E) take no action relative to allowed claim 5 because the claim is fully supported in the specification. 3. Ii1 response to the final rejection, you filed an amendment adding a new claim 7, dependent from claim 1. Claim 7 sets forth more details of the plurality of V -shaped seals. The examiner denied entry of the amendment. In the Appeal Brief, you argued that the examiner's denial of entry is not well founded, and that the new claim defines over both the Miller and Jones patents. In accordance with established PTO practice and procedure, the Board would (A) point out in the opinion portion of its decision that the denial of entry of the amendment by the examiner after a final rejection is properly contested by petition to the Commissioner, and not by appeal to the Board. (B) consider new dependent claim 7 separately of claim 1 since it has been separately argued and distinguished from the Miller and Jones patents. (C) consider riew dependent claim 7 as standing with claim 1. (D) remand the application to the examiner with a directive that the amendment be entered. (E) remand the application to the examiner and order reconsideration of the denial of entry of the amendment in light of the argument presented in the Appeal Brief. 16

38 4. Which of the following, if any, would be a proper argument in the Appeal Brief that independent claim 1 is not anticipated by Miller under 35 U.S.C. 102(b)? (A) The stopper structure disclosed in the Miller patent is not capable of releasing gas from a bottle in a controlled man11er. In Miller, none of the gas can be released from within the bottle until the stopper is complptely disengaged from the bottle. (B) The claimed seal structure on the outside surface of the tubular body portion 18 of the described invention is completely different from the seal structure on the outside surface of the flexible skirt portion 24 of Miller. (C) The concept of the appellant's invention, as clearly described in the background and objectives of the appellant's disclosure, is completely absent in the applied prior art. (D) The Miller patent is not prior art under any of the paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 because it was issued more than 17 years ago. (E) None of the above. 5. During the prosecution of the Jones application on appeal, you filed an antedating affidavit to antedate the Jones patent. The examiner held that the affidavit did not avoid the rejection under 35 U.S.C. 102(b). Which of the following arguments, if any, if presented in the Appeal Brief, would be appropriate to overcome the rejection over the Jones patent? (A) The Jones patent is not a proper reference because there is no identical correspondence between the disclosure of the patent and the disclosure of Jones' application. Therefore, it is respectfully requested that the Board reverse the examiner's rejection. (B) Claims 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 are not anticipated by Jones. The Jones patent does not disclose the tubular body portion having a spiral channel to control the release of pressurized gases from the bottle. It is respectfully requested that the rejection be reversed. (C) The rejection should be reversed because a proper antedating affidavit has been submitted by applicant duling the prosecution of the application swearing back to a date prior to the filing date of the Jones patent. The subject matter now claimed properly dates back to the flling date of the Jones patent. (D) The Board should not affirm the rejection since it is a fundamental precept of patent law that an inventor's own patent can never be used against that inventor in a rejection as statutory prior art, but only on the ground of statutory or obviousness type double patenting. Since the examiner has not rejected the claims on double patenting, the rejection is improper and should be reversed. (E) None of the above. 17

39 6. Which one of the following dependent claims, if present in the application, would patentably and properly define the invention over the Miller and Jones patents? (A) The bottle stopper of claim 6 wherein said plastic is polyethylene and wherein said disc portion, said tubular body portion, said annular skirt, and said plurality of V -shaped se(lls are formed from one piece of polyethylene. (B) The bottle stopper of claim 1 wherein said cap is made of polyethylene and the outer diameter of said tubular body portion is less than the inner diameter of said annular skirt. (C) The bottle stopper of claim 2 wherein said outside surface of said tubular body portion further includes a spiral thread between said means for sealingly engaging said inner annular surface of said neck of said bottle and said pressurized product within said bottle for controllably releasing pressurized gas from within said bottle. (D) The bottle stopper of claim 1 wherein said outside surface of said tubular body portion includes a single annular means for sealingly engaging said inner annular surface of said neck of said bottle. (E) The bottle stopper of claim 4 wherein said plurality of V -shaped seals comprises at least three V -shaped seals. 7. In your Appeal Brief, you stated with regard to the rejection of claims 1, 2, 3 and 6 as being anticipated by the Miller patent that "The claims on appeal do not stand or fall together." You did not argue the individual merits of dependent claims 2, 3 and 6 in the Brief. Upon review of the Brief, the examiner did not prepare an Examiner's Answer, but notified you by letter that the Brief did not comply with the PTO rules because you did not argue therein the individual merits of dependent claims 2, 3 and 6. The examiner set a one month time limit for response to his letter. Which one of the following actions, if timely, would avoid dismissal of the appeal as to claims 2, 3 and 6? (A) File a response stating that it is sufficient to state in the Appeal Brief that claims do not stand or fall together, and that inasmuch as a Notice of Appeal and Appeal Brief have been timely filed, the ~oard must consider individually the merits of the rejection of each dependent claims on appeal; and that if the rejection of any of claims 2, 3 and 6 is unsound, the rejection must be reversed. (B) File an amended Appeal Brief offering arguments why claims 2, 3 and 6 are each separately patentable. (C) File an amended Appeal Brief pointing out in the argument section of the amended Appeal Brief that claims 2, 3, and 6 must be considered independently because the claims were grouped with claim 1 and rejected as being anticipated under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) by Miller, and consideration of the merits of the rejection of these appealed claims, individually, is clearly requested in the Brief. 18

40 (D) File a petition with the examiner requesting the examiner to exercise his authority to waive the rules. (E) File a Reply Brief wherein you argue that the Board must consider the dependent claims separately inasmuch as the Miller patent does not suggest or disclose the limitations set forth in dependent claims 2, 3 and For the purposes of this question, assume that the Jones patent does not exist and that the only rejection that can be made for claim 4 is under 35 U.S.C. 103 based upon Miller, as set forth in the final rejection. Twenty days after receipt of the Examiner's Answer, you receive a letter from Jones bringing to your attention, for the first time, sales of the stopper covered by claim 4. The first sale occurred after the Jones application on appeal was filed. You are informed that the sales have increased 200% per year and that the stopper has significantly replaced the stopper sold by competitors because of the presence of the three V -shaped seals. In fact, you find out that every stopper sold by your client includes the three V-shaped seals. Which one of the following actions, if any, would be procedurally appropriate in seeking to have the sales information substantively considered with regard to the rejection of the claims under 35 U.S.C. 103? (A) Prepare and file an affidavit signed by Jones regarding the sales activity accompanied by a showing of good and sufficient reasons why the affidavit was not earlier presented and a request that the application be remanded to the examiner for consideration. (B) File a written request for an oral hearing during which hearing you can inform the Board of the newly discovered sales information so that the Board can rely upon it during consideration of the rejection of claim 4. (C) File a Reply Brief adding a new argument relative to the rejection of claim 4 based upon the specific sales information. (D) Prepare an affidavit over your signature detailing the sales information given to you by your client, and s~bmit same with an argument in a Reply Brief. (E) Obtain an extension of time from the Board so that an affidavit over your signature regarding the sales information can be prepared and timely filed with a proper Reply Brief. 19

41 Test Number 014A Test Series 293 NAME 'C.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE UNITED ST.ATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE REGISTRATION EXAMINATION FOR PATENT ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS October 13, 199~ AFTERNOON SECTION Supplement for Part II DO NOT TURN THIS PAGE UNTIL YOU ARE INSTRUCTED TO CHECK THE CONTENTS OF THIS EXAMINATION BOOKLET OR TO BEGIN THE EXAMINATION 1

42 THE U.S. APPLICATION OF JONES ON APPEAL / 18 ~ ~ This invention relates to a threaded bottle stopper for a bottle of champagne which controls the release of pressurized gas from the bottle to preclude both ejection of the stopper at a dangerous velocity and undesirable premature spillage of the contents of the bottle. With known prior art stoppers for champagne bottles, a problem exists in that the removal of the stopper from the neck of the bottle is either too easy or too difficult. As is well known, stoppers for bottles containing champagne can be ejected from the bottle at a dangerous velocity causing possible bodily injury and/or property damage. It is therefore a principal object of the present invention to provide a threaded bottle stopper which reduces the hazard of the bottle stopper being ejected froni the bottle at a high velocity and controls the release of pressurized gas from within the bottle so that the stopper is withdrawn from the bottle in a controlled manner, but with the familiar "pop" sound associated with the opening of a bottle of champagne. FIG. 1 shows a one piece bottle stopper 12 made of plastic, e.g. polyethylene. The stopper includes a cap that comprises a 1 Q.isc portion 14 with an annular skirt 16 depending from an inner surface 20 of the disc portion at its outer periphery. A continuous mechanical thread 26 is provided on the inside surface of the skirt 16 which 'engages a mating thread 42 on the external surface of bottle neck 40, as shown in FIG. 2. A flexible tubular body portion 18, generally concentric with the skirt, also extends from the inner surface 20 of the disc portion. The outer diameter of the tubular body portion 18 is less than the inner diameter of the skirt 16 so that an annular space 22 is defined therebetween. An annular base section 32 of the inner surface 20 of disc portion 14 constitutes the base of the annular space 22. Three concentric V -shaped seals 34 are provided on the annular base section 32 to contact the rim 46 of the bottle neck 40 and thereby seal the contents of the bottle, as shown in FIG. 2. These seals are described in my U.S. Pat. No. 9,999,999, which patent in its entirety is incorporated herein by reference. The outside surface 28 of the tubular body portion 18 is provided with structure which acts as a means for sealingly engaging the inner annular surface 44 of the bottle neck 40 and as a means for controllably releasing pressurized gas from within the bottle. The structure comprises an annular sealing ring 38 and 2

43 a single spiral thread 36, each being integral with the outside surface 28 of the tubular body portion 18. The annular sealing ring 38 is positioned adjacent the annular base section 32 and is intended to be selectively moved into and out of sealing engagement with the inner annular surface 44 of the bottle neck 40. The single spiral thread 36 has a first end adjacent open end 62 of the tubular body portion 18 and a second end terminating at the annular sealing ring 38. The outside surface 28 of the tubular body portion 18 has a diameter that is less than the diameter of the inner annular surface 44 cf the bottle neck 40 thereby defining an annular space 48. As shown in FIG. 2, the periphery 36a of the single spiral thread 36 contacts the inner annular surface 44 of the bottle neck 40 such that a spiral channel 50 is formed within space 48. When the bottle stopper is fully assembled on the bottle, the spiral channel 50 is open to the gas of the champagne at its first end, but is closed at its second end by sealing ring 38. The gas within the bottle is thereby prevented from passing into space 48 above the sealing ring 38. In operation, when the stopper is sufficiently partially rotated counter-clockwise, the V -shaped seals 34 and sealing ring 38 are released from engagement with the bottle, as shown in FIG. 3. The partial rotation of the stopper is not sufficient to release the engagement of threads 26 and 42 of the stopper and bottle, respectively. The seal release opens the interior of the bottle to the atmosphere via the spiral channel 50 and the unsealed spacing between the threads 26 and 42 of the stopper and bottle, respectively. The spiral channel 50 functions to control the flow of gas 54 released from the bottle into space 52 to reduce the danger of a high velocity release of the stopper and retains sufficient pressure within the bottle to have the desired "pop" when the stopper is fully released by further unscrewing the stopper from the bottle. What is claimed is: 1. A bottle stopper for containing a pressurized product within a bottle comprising a cap, said cap including a disc portion having an inner surface and an outer periphery, an annular skirt depending from said inner surface at said outer periphery, a tubular body portion depending from said inner surface of said disc portion radially inwardly of said annular skirt so as to defme an annular space therebetween, said annular space being defined in part by an annular base section of said inner surface of said disc portion, said annular base section including a plurality of V -shaped seals for engaging a rim of a neck of said pottle when said neck is positioned within said annular space, said annular skirt including an inside surface having threads thereon intended to engage threads on an external surface of said neck of said bottle, and said tubular body portion including an outside surface intended to engage an inner annular surface of saj.d neck of said bottle when said neck is received within said annular space. I ;. 2. The bottle stopper of claim 1 wherein said outside surface of the tubular body portion includes a means for sealingly engaging said inner annular surface of said neck of said bottle when said neck is received within said annular space. 3. The bottle stopper of claim 2 wherein said means for sealingly engaging comprises a single annular seal. 4. The bottle stopper of claim 1 wherein said plurality of V -shaped seals comprises three V -shaped seals. 5. The bottle stopper of claim 1 wherein said tubular body portion is flexible. 6. The bottle stopper of claim 1 wherein said stopper is fabricated from plastic. 3

44 .. MILLER PATENT (U.S. Pat. No. 7,777,777) This invention relates to a combination closure cap and stopper for bottles. An object of the invention is to provide a cap which displays improved sealing efficiency and is resistant to being popped out by expansion of the contained product. FIG. 1 shows a flexible closure cap 10 of polyethylene closing off the neck 12 of a glass bottle. FIG. 2 shows the cap initially placed over a bottle. The cap 10 includes a disc 16 and a cylindrical wallis fixed to the edge of the disc. The interior surface of the wall 18 is provided with threads 20 for engaging cooperating threads 22 on the annular exterior surface of the neck 12 of the bottle. 22 The cap also includes a flexible skirt 24 connected to the disc 16 by a frusto-conical collar 26. Skirt 24 is concentric with and spaced apart from the cylindrical wall 18 so that a cylindrical sealing portion 28 of the skirt can engage the interior surface of the neck 12. The diameter of the sealing portion 28 exceeds the internal diameter of the neck 12. The skirt 24 is radially compressed when the bevel 30 of the skirt enters the neck 12. Two annular sealing ribs 34 of triangular cross-section are provided concentrically on the disc 16 and abut the end surface 36 of the neck 12 when the closure cap 10 completely closes the bottle as seen in FIG. 1. In assembled position, the sealing portion 28 of the skirt engages the interior surface of the neck 12. The flexure of the collar 26 permits the skirt to engage the neck resiliently thereby effectively sealing bottles whose inside neck diameter varies slightly from standard dimensions. Due to the resiliency of the material used to make the cap the ribs 34 axially compress slightly to provide additional sealing when the cap 10 is fully assembled on the bottle. FIGS. 1 and 2 are from the parent patent of the U.S. application of Jones on appeal. The numerals in the figures are interchangeable with the numerals in the figures in the Jones application on appeal. The stopper 10 of this patent is identical to the stopper of the Jones application except that this patent does not disclose the single spiral thread 36 on the outer surface of the flexible tubular portion 28 that is described in the application on appeal. JONES PATENT (U.S. Pat. No. 9,999,999) This patent more specifically describes the plural V -shaped seals on the inner surface of the disc portion 14 as comprised of three concentric seals 34. Inner and outer seals of the concentric seals 34 are deflectable and the intermediate seal is a compression seal that is considerably shorter than the inner and outer deflectable seals. The combination of the three concentric V -shaped seals has been found to conform to any nonuniformities on the rim 46 of the neck of the bottle. 4