This course is the required starting point for students preparing for the USPTO Registration Examination (Patent Bar). This class introduces the structure of the exam and trains students in the single most important test skill: quickly locating and applying the correct authority in the MPEP. Students learn how the exam is scored and timed, how questions are written, and how to use a repeatable “rule → lookup → eliminate → confirm” method to answer questions efficiently under pressure.
This course trains students to do what the Patent Bar rewards most: navigate the MPEP quickly and apply the patentability rules to exam-style fact patterns. This course strengthens MPEP lookup speed and accuracy while covering the “core four” patentability areas that drive a large share of exam questions—35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, and 112. Students learn how to spot the tested issue, jump to the right MPEP section, extract the controlling rule, and eliminate trap answer choices under timed conditions.
This course focuses on the Patent Bar’s high-frequency rules for properly filing a U.S. patent application and identifying what the USPTO requires to accord a filing date, complete missing parts, and avoid costly procedural mistakes. Using MPEP 600 as the primary roadmap, students learn the purpose and function of each required component—specification, claims, drawings, abstract, fees, ADS, and oath/declaration—and how those pieces change depending on the filing type (provisional vs nonprovisional; continuation, divisional, CIP).
This course prepares students to master the Patent Bar’s most tested procedural terrain: USPTO prosecution after filing. Centered on MPEP 700, this course teaches how to read and respond to non-final and final Office Actions, select the correct procedural tool, and avoid deadline and “trap option” mistakes that commonly cost points on the exam. Students build a repeatable framework for choosing the best next step—amendment, argument, interview, after-final practice, RCE, appeal, petition, or abandonment/revival strategy—based on the posture of the application and what the examiner is requiring.
This course focuses on the Patent Bar rules that control who has authority to act before the USPTO and what paperwork is required to prove it. Students learn to distinguish inventorship, ownership, and representation—and how each affects signing authority, correspondence, access to an application, and the ability to file documents or make binding procedural decisions. The course emphasizes the exam’s most common “who can sign / who can file / what must be submitted” fact patterns, using MPEP 300 (Ownership & Assignment) and MPEP 400 (Representative of Applicant) as the primary references.
This course teaches students how to choose the correct procedural path when something goes wrong—or when the examiner and applicant disagree—an area heavily tested on the USPTO Patent Bar. This course trains students to distinguish appealable issues (substantive rejections decided by the PTAB) from petitionable issues (procedural matters decided by the Director/designee), and to identify the proper filing, timing, and next step in common exam scenarios.
This course covers what happens after allowance and after a patent issues, focusing on the Patent Bar rules students must know for issue procedures, post-issue corrections, and the main post-grant “fix or challenge” pathways. Students learn how the USPTO moves an application from Notice of Allowance to issuance, what options exist for changes after allowance, and how to identify the correct mechanism for correcting errors—especially the exam-favorite distinctions among post-issue correction tools.
PAT 135 consolidates the Patent Bar’s “high-impact wrap-up” topics that often decide passing scores: international filing and priority rules, AIA post-grant procedures, the essentials of design and plant patents, and ethics/duty of candor concepts tested in practice-before-the-USPTO scenarios. This course is designed to help students recognize these questions quickly, avoid common timeline and terminology traps, and use the MPEP efficiently to confirm the controlling rule under exam time pressure.