PTO Registration Examination on-paper Summer 2007.

For those of you who do not want to take the computer-based registration exam, the USPTO has announced that it will hold three days of paper-based registration exams on July 16, 20, and 30, 2007.

Although registration materials are due by April 9, 2007, you should apply early before the exam is sold-out.

• Paper Exam Notice
• Office of Enrollment and Discipline

Comments

[Hon. Patent Atty.]

Here's one reason to become a patent lawyer: "Wright Brothers' Patent Lawyer Gets His Own Statue." "He was a pioneer as a patent lawyer." See http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1160397320289 (2006 marks the 100-year anniversary of the flying machine's patent.)

[Dennis Crouch]

The wright brothers provide an interesting case-study for patenting. I heard a tale of how the strength of their patent ended up delaying the development of the airplane for at least a decade. Any history buffs out there?

[Patrick Anderson]

There are a number of interesting lessons from the Wright brothers story. I don't know specifically about a delay in airplane development, but I do know that they had to, on occassion, enforce their patents vigorously. See, e.g., Wright Co. v. Herring-Curtiss Co, 177 F. 257.

My favorite story, was that apparently their original patent application was drafted pro se, and was rejected by the Examiner. It was only after hiring their patent attorney that it was successfully prosecuted and issued. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wright_brothers

I always conveniently mention this story to people who inevitably ask: "Do I really need a patent attorney? I heard you can do most of the work yourself and save money."

My reply: "Sure you can, but..."

[Mark Perdue]

I often tell people that it's a system that was designed to be self-serve (pro se), much like filing your own taxes. But, like taxes, so much BS has grown up around it that you are really taking your life into your own hands to DIY. I also refer them to Patent It Yourself, a pretty good book. That usually deters them from proceeding on their own.

[j]

For those with good computer literacy and basic familiarity with the patent law, I recommend avoiding the paper test. It's much easier to learn to search the provided electronic MPEP than it is to exhaustively tab a paper copy.

[Anonymous]

The Wright Brothers / Glenn Curtiss story is told in Seth Shulman's 2002 (2003?) book, "Unlocking the Sky". It's an interesting read, albeit somewhat naive on patent law and claim interpretation/doctrine of equivalents. Shulman is a big proponent of Open Source, and thinks that would've been a better model for the airplane's development. I think he may be throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but I'd recommend this book, nonetheless.

[Andi Reese]

"Top lawyers in Toulmin's field will gather in Springfield and Dayton Thursday for a series of events marking the patent's centennial anniversary and honoring the memory of Toulmin."

I guess I'm not a top lawyers in Toulmin's field. Are you (were you there)?

[Ron Harris]

In response to Hon. Patent Attorney's comment about the stifling effect of the Wright brothers' patent on airplane innovation: I agree, by inventing the airplane, the Wright brothers definitely set us back several generations. We are only just now recovering from their detructive tactics. It would have been much better for the airplane industry had they sat around and drank beer instead of greedily working and trying actually to get paid for their work. I mean the nerve of those... those... CAPITALISTS! :) Seriously, what is wrong with a strong patent? A better question may be, what is so honorable about touting weak ones as we face the IP-insensitive barrel of a Chinese economic jaggernaut?