Talk:USPTO registration examination

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Necessary addition[edit]

This article currently says nothing about the character of the test's content. E.g., do the questions relate to physics/engineering topics, or matters of patent procedure, or both, or...? Are intensive mathematical calculations required on some questions? What branches of physics and engineering are most represented? Are there components of reading comprehension/vocabulary? Robert K S (talk) 05:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's mostly procedural. There is some testing of the law of patentable subject matter but the science/engineering aspects are simplified so that anyone who's taken general freshman level college science courses or even properly structured Advanced Placement courses can understand it. They understand that it would be unfair to give a question on, say, a really advanced issue in chemical engineering to engineers specializing in computer science, or a question on advanced molecular biology to an electrical engineer.
You don't need to understand the entire body of patent law because it is way way too big to fit into one person's head, and the USPTO totally understands that. What they do want to see is if testtakers understand basic concepts like patentable subject matter (e.g. no perpetual motion machines unless you have a working model!) and nonobviousness. They want to see if testtakers understand the structure of the MPEP and can efficiently navigate it to find answers to the kind of obscure questions which regularly pop up in patent practice. --Coolcaesar (talk) 07:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Reorg / TOC[edit]

I added section headings, shifted text around, and a TOC. Please expand on background. Satch69 (talk) 20:57, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I am working on developing the background section. Hmehta (talk) 23:39, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Aliens[edit]

From the article: "This law on Aliens, 37 C.F.R. 11.6(c), is not enforced by the USPTO Office of Enrollment and Discipline (OED)."

Can someone provide support for this? My experience has been to the contrary. I will remove this statement if there is no objection within the next few days. Satch69 (talk) 15:29, 19 February 2009 (UTC)