Took the computer based exam today in Madison, WI, and the problem with freezing when using "find again" was still occuring. I found choosing the option of keeping the find box on the screen (check box in lower left corner) worked exactly as find again would, i.e., just keep hitting find and it works its way through whatever chapter of the MPEP or appendix you happen to have open.
Based on my strategy while taking old exams, I relied heavily on the subject index in the MPEP. Essentially, once you get to know this index for its relative strengths and weaknesses, it can become an invaluable aid in selecting the appropriate subsection of the MPEP to search in, better than scanning the table of contents in each chapter. If the index failed, I resorted to the "find" feature, although I would strongly caution future test takers to avoid relying heavily on the find feature. Its very important to be sure the section you're reading about is really the best for the question asked, and you can make sure of this by choosing the best context in the MPEP vis a vis what chapter you're looking at for your answer.
As usual, in several cases the answer could be located verbatim in the MPEP (always a nice feeling when you locate those, no?)
Additionally, several, i.e. at least 20-30 of the 100 questions were verbatim from past exams, and several were from the Oct 2003 exam. I strongly recommend test takers drill on this exam AT LEAST the day before the exam. In many cases, the answer options were verbatim as well.
Several questions were new, and a surprising number were ambiguously written. Disproportionately weighted subject matter was: actions during appeal (i.e. reply briefs, transfer from appeal back to prosecution, action by you and action by examiner after appeal); restriction requirements; broadening reissue (see below); PCT (several questions covered proper claims for benefit of priority of PCT application in fact patterns with complex foreign, international, and US priority situations, and the effect of such complicated applications as prior art under 102(e); questions (as usual) about filing date, especially when applications were filed with missing parts; and a surprising number of questions about appropriate actions to be taken in the event of deceased or incapacitated inventors. I'd suggest drilling on this last topic, covered in MPEP 400, but its so easy to find during the exam you shouldn't bother memorizing it. Instead, memorize the Oct 2003 exam. You will be glad you did.
Finally, beware a seemingly repeated long question in the afternoon session dealing with broadening reissue. A similar version of this question appeared in the Oct 2003 exam, and the two fact scenarios, both of which deal with timeliness of filing declaration for broadening reissue, are NOT the same. As always, READ the questions and answers carefully.
I used Kayton's PRG exclusively, and found it very useful, but I would recommend other Kayton users to stress use of the computer simulated exams with looking stuff up via the MPEP index, and destress reading the written materials. The 6 volume Kayton treatise appears to be an excellent work for patent practitioners, with a lot of extraneous information dealing with case history and litigation that is simply not necessary for any non-current practitioners preparing for the exam.
Most of all, good luck!
Author
Topic: New Patent Bar Online Exam - Prometric (Read 575239 times)
