Test Questions

Page 4 of 4
<< Back

The next several questions relate to the following references, hypothetically identified by you in a prior art search for material to be forwarded to the USPTO in connection with the Rocking Chair Patent Application:

8. Relate each of the preceding three references to the claim or claims of the Rocking Chair Patent Application for which it is potentially invalidating prior art (i.e., art showing each element of the claim) ... if any such claim(s) exist.


Reference (i)
1. All claims
2. No claims
3. Claims 1 and 3
4. Claim 3 only
   
   [ Show Answer ]
   iii, claims 1 and 3. Reference i, the three-legged stool, includes all the elements of both claims 1 and 3, but is missing elements of the other claims (e.g., the arms and back of claim 2; "four legs" of claim 4; the rocking means of claim 5; elements b-e of claim 6.
   
   
Reference (ii)
1. All claims
2. No claims
3. Claims 1 and 2
4. Claim 6 only
   
   [ Show Answer ]
   iii, claims 1 and 2. A rocking chair with six legs includes the limitations of claim 1, and also of claim 2. Note: Although the reference is clearly relevant to all the other claims (because, for example, "at least three legs" covers six legs; and "comprising four legs" also covers six legs (the word "comprising" in a patent claim means "at least") ... still there are potentially valid interpretations of these other claims. For example, all these other claims could conceivably be validly interpreted to cover a rocking chair with four legs, even in light of reference ii.
   
   
Reference (iii)
1. All claims
2. No claims
3. Claims 5
4. Claim 1, 4, and 5
   
   [ Show Answer ]
   iv, Claims 1, 4, and 5. The rocking horse includes all the limitations of each of these three claims. Note: Although the reference is clearly relevant to claim 3, there might be a way to interpret claim 3 as still valid (for example, it might validly read on a milking stool, or a three-legged rocking chair (if one can conceive of such a thing) even in light of reference iii.
   
   
9. Relate each of the preceding three references to the claim or claims (if any) for which it would be clearly relevant (though perhaps not completely invalidating) prior art.


Reference (i)
1. All claims
2. Claims 1, 3, and 6
3. Claims 1 and 3
   
   [ Show Answer ]
   iii, claims 1 and 3. The stool's elements form at least a portion of only claims 1 and 3.
   
   
Reference (ii)
1. All claims
2. Claims 1, 3, and 6
3. Claims 1 and 3
   
   [ Show Answer ]
   i, all claims. Every element of each claim has interpretations that can read on elements of the six-legged rocking chair (for example, "at least three legs" reads on "six legs". "Comprising four legs" reads on six legs; etc ...)
   
   
Reference (iii)
1. All claims
2. Claims 1, 4, and 5
3. Claims 1, 3, 4, and 5
   
   [ Show Answer ]
   iii, claims 1, 3, 4, and 5. In addition to 1, 4, and 5, (shown as potentially invalidating these claims above) the reference is relevant to claim 3 since a rocking horse has a platform and a support element with at least three legs though there might be a valid interpretation of claim 3 even in light of reference iii (for example, a milking stool, or a three-legged rocking horse if such is possible....) )
   
   
10. Consider a reference in a widely circulated journal, dated 2/16/2003, which discloses a platform for sitting upon (with no support element, arms, back, or rockers). Would it be appropriate to forward this reference to the USPTO in connection with the Rocking Chair Patent Application? If so, which claims would it be relevant to?

[ Show Answer ]
Yes - the reference is relevant to all claims. Although a platform does not encompass all elements of any claim, it might be considered to form part of an obviousness argument for invalidity in connection with other reference(s) possibly already in the possession of the USPTO.