Date: 13.2.2017 / Article Rating: 5 / Votes: 550
Professay.info #Chocolat joanne harris essay

Recent Posts

Home >> Uncategorized >> Chocolat joanne harris essay

Chocolat joanne harris essay

Oct/Wed/2017 | Uncategorized








Chocolat | Joanne Harris

Chocolat joanne harris essay

How to buy essay cheap with no worries -
Chocolat Themes | GradeSaver

Career change resume - FAQs and Tips. Appropriate tertiary qualifications. Chocolat Joanne Essay! Career objectives that are consistent with the character essay handout, applicant's experience and the role (i.e. realistic expectations). Joanne Harris Essay! Competency statements (outline of skills, knowledge and attributes) that match the role requirement. Remember that you control the content of your resume. There are some things that you should include, but in easy essay on summer vacations the end it is up to joanne harris essay, you to decide whether it is post traumatic stress disorder relevant or impressive to an employer. Don't include anything that will raise doubts or cause you to be screened out. Chocolat Joanne! Deal with such information in an interview, not a resume. Don't use abbreviations. Use professional or technical jargon only if it is relevant to the design argument, the position you seek.

Don't add irrelevant information eg marital status, health status or DOB. Use plain A4 white paper. Joanne Harris! Don't leave gaps between employment dates. List jobs by top creative, month or year depending on their length. Try to include employment that is directly relevant to the job you are applying for. Chocolat! Be consistent with your formatting. Use good spacing to make it easy to read.

Use a good quality printer. Keep the presentation of your resume simple. Employers are more interested in the content. It should be neat and easy to read but you don't have to go to post stress essay, great expense using fancy paper or folders. Q. Chocolat Joanne Harris! What is the difference between a resume and CV?

There is no difference between a resume and curriculum vitae (CV). Most current employers use these terms interchangeably. Employers ask for one as part of the process of about hiring a person. Joanne Harris Essay! Q. Why have resumes become such a crucial first part of the job application process? Because you need to present yourself the best you can, in order to increase your chances of being short-listed for an interview.

Q. How do you get to be a successful applicant? By developing a targeted professional resume that highlights what the employer is looking for. Q. Why might I be successful with one resume and not another? It may be because you underestimated yourself and undersold your abilities. More often than not, it is because you didn't target your resume and/or communicate your skills and abilities in essay about a clear way. Q. Chocolat Joanne Essay! How do I communicate in a targeted way? Make sure your resume addresses the requirements of the easy essay vacations, job. Many jobs have selection criteria listed in the job advertisement or job application, which makes this easier. However, the advertisement may have limited information about the requirements of the role. Some employers deliberately keep this open and ambiguous, so that the quality and chocolat joanne harris, expertise of the applicants decide to some degree what the essay, role will be. They may have a rough idea of the kind of person or skills they are looking for, but they look at the skills and expertise of the applicants to harris, guide their final decision.

Q. How do I target my resume if there is limited information? Research is the important key! You need to research the organisation and the job, role or position. It is also important to highlight your transferable skills in easy essay on summer vacations your resume. Harris! Transferable skills are those generic skills you have developed through life that may not directly relate to the job you are applying for or want to apply for. They are particularly important for students and graduates who may have limited work experience. Some examples of transferable skills include communication skills (written and about, verbal), team work, leadership, initiative, enthusiasm and chocolat joanne essay, interpersonal skills. Easy Vacations! Although you may not have direct experience in a particular area, you can target your resume to chocolat joanne, a job by highlighting your transferable skills . These are skills developed from experiences such as your studies, work placements or part-time work. Q. Top Creative Writing! What if I have limited work experience?

It's important to see yourself as a whole package. While you may have limited work experience in chocolat joanne the field you wish to the design argument, work, an employer may look for your potential skills through your resume. Most graduate employers will look at what you have done in your studies and even outside your studies, such as extra-curricular activities, projects, vacation work, and professional memberships to decide whether you have the transferable skills to do the job. Q. What do you do if you have limited work experience? You could consider using a functional format for your resume. This format is designed to emphasise your qualifications rather than specific jobs. You could include a skills summary in your resume, i.e. a concise statement of chocolat essay your key skills related to the job you're applying for. Your skills summary may include transferable skills developed in part-time, casual, volunteer work or in your studies. If you have undertaken relevant work experience or voluntary work, don't state that it was unpaid. Your resume is a capabilities statement of what skills, expertise and benefits you could bring to your future employer.

Q. Essay! What if my work experience is not directly relevant to the job? Highlight your transferable skills. You may not have direct experience in this area, but you might have transferable skills that can be applied across this job. Often it is chocolat joanne these transferable skills that make you unique and give you an edge in an interview. Q. Should I include a photo of myself in my resume? No. Employers don't have time to filter through piles of information and documentation. Unless your photo adds direct value (i.e. modelling or acting work), leave it out. Q. How do I submit my academic results with my resume? Unless requested, you don't need to include your academic results with your resume. If your results are requested, you may need to provide a certified copy of them.

You can get certified copies of argument your results from the chocolat, university you attended (usually for a fee) or you can get a copy signed by essay, pharmacist or police officer. Q. What if I have poor academic results? Don't include them in your resume. Don't include anything in your resume that you think will rule you out of contention (e.g. date of birth, etc). You can always address this issue in an interview if raised. Q. How do I submit my resume online? How do I target it to an employer or job? When you submit your resume via email to an employer, attach the resume in Microsoft Word format to your email. If you are sending the resume to a person, make sure you address that person at the beginning on chocolat essay the email.

Use formal not informal language. Don't spam employers. They will just delete your application if it is part of group mailout and essay, is not targeted. Q. I'm older and worried my age will work against chocolat harris, me. What can I do?

Highlight your most recent work history and accomplishments that demonstrate your ability to do the essay picnic, work you're applying for. Make sure you don't include too much of your work history. Don't include date of birth or high-school education and chocolat joanne harris, don't go back too far in your work experience. Try to programs, structure you resume to suit the targeted job you are going for. A functional resume format is often the best approach. Q. Chocolat Harris Essay! What if I have gaps in employment or education? Describe what you were doing while out of the work force under an appropriate heading e.g. skills, voluntary or community work (especially if it provided you with valuable experience).

Use a skills based resume. Don't panic if you don't cover them all. Just include the years you worked rather than the month and year. If questioned in an interview explain the argument essay, reasons why and keep highlighting your strengths (e.g. Harris! I wasn't working at essay that time because I really wanted to essay, focus on my studies. This demonstrates that you are committed to essay about picnic, doing a good job. Q. What if I've only worked for joanne essay, one employer? If you've had different positions within the organization, then list the easy vacations, positions separately and explain your responsibilities and chocolat joanne essay, accomplishments in to thesis report writing each one.

If you've stayed in chocolat essay one position only, make sure that you list and expand on your accomplishments for top creative programs, that position. Q. What if I have had a lot of short-term jobs? Try to combine several jobs into one common area. For example, under 'Employment' state: '1998-2000 Office administration duties at a hardware store, insurance company and consulting firm.' Q. What if I'm interested in more than one work opportunity? Modify your resume for each position so that it is targeted to each organisation and joanne, role. Q. What if I haven't finished my studies? Under the post traumatic disorder, 'Education' section in your resume, state: 'Graduation/diploma/degree anticipated in (date)' Q. I'm a student and the only harris essay, jobs I've held are part-time and summer jobs. How do I make them seem important?

Every job you've held is important because you acquired workplace experience. Q. What do I do if I have no relevant work experience ? Get some relevant experience through volunteering. Re-examine all your past work and volunteer experiences and see what transferable skills can be highlighted. Q. What do employers look for when selecting graduates? On average, Human Resources (HR) managers spend 15 seconds to top creative writing, 4 minutes reading each resume.

What an joanne harris essay, employer looks for in an applicant may vary depending on top creative the job they are trying to fill. However, usually there are common skills or competencies in all jobs. This is especially true in graduate recruitment, where an employer may look to recruit a graduate with generic skills or competencies which can be developed.

Buy Essay Papers Here -
Chocolat Summary - eNotes com

Patent Law School Exam: Essay No. Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay! 3. 3. (15 POINTS) Under 35 U.S.C. § 112 patent claims may be invalidated as indefinite. The Federal Circuit has interpreted the character analysis essay law to chocolat harris invalidate patented claims only when those claims are “insolubly ambiguous.” The insolubly ambiguous standard is a high standard, and patent claims are quite unlikely to be found invalid under that standard. More recently, policymakers have considered lowering the standard, but only for post traumatic disorder essay pre-issuance patent applications undergoing patent prosecution. Is this proposal a good idea? Why?

Law Professor at chocolat joanne, the University of Missouri School of Law. View all posts by Dennis Crouch → 133 thoughts on “ Patent Law School Exam: Essay No. 3 ” Folks, please don’t denigrate the word “ambiguous” According to the Collins English Dictionary the word “ambiguous” has two distinct definitions: 1. having more than one possible interpretation or meaning.

2. difficult to the design argument essay understand or classify; obscure. There is ABSOLUTELY nothing wrong with a patent term having more than one possible meaning – in fact it’s a good thing, in joanne harris essay, that it allows one write a claim of essay picnic appropriate scope without being prolix. There is also nothing wrong (at least according to the Federal Circuit) with a patent term that is merely “difficult” (i.e. challenging or demanding) to joanne harris essay understand. “The answer is stress disorder essay, that, except for certain crybaby gadflies – like Mooney, nobody cares because Mooney is crap. Joanne Harris Essay! If somebody actually cared Mooney would be careful and focused, from beginning to end, and beginning with the decision to not bother getting involved in patents in the first place.” Referring to the original post, what utterly worthless garbage. The above edits are provided to offer a more realistic interpretation of the original crap post.

The standard IS already lower during prosecution. The policy makers and the design, patent law school professors should find something else to do than gratuitous intermeddling. On a related note, has anyone here been an applicant, an examiner, and a practitioner as well? I have met many people who are 2 out of joanne harris essay 3, but very rarely did I meet someone who was 3 out of 3. “As I said to MM, when you out yourself, I’ll consider outing myself. Actually, that question is rhetorical since I would never do it.” That’s fair.

How about picking out a random published app and give your take on Office abuse? “That particular attorney pi ssed me off by actually successfully traversing a legit restriction.” Follow up question. How does a practitioner successfully traverse a restriction if the restriction was legit? Granted that not many people understand MPEP 800, which is rumoured to post traumatic be currently undergoing major reconstruction, if you correctly assessed the inventions and/or species, followed by estalishing the burdensomeness of searching, how then can the essay requirements be successfully traversed? I feel that if the groupings you make up are not subject to statutory double patenting rejections when filed in divisionals, the burdensome search is pretty much a freebie test. If he/she/it traversed your burdensome search criterion correctly, you did a pretty bad job of establishing the burden. Any comments on what happened in programs, the case? “I don’t think I’ve seen a legit restriction, even following the examiner-friendly MPEP, in all my years of practicing. Chocolat Essay! BTW — when I say legit restriction, I don’t mean that the “end result” was proper (i.e., the claims were properly restrictable), I mean that the examiner properly discharged the burden of establishing that these claims should be properly restricted”

Right. Never seen one in introduction report writing, all your years. I’m not unfamiliar with restriction practice. I don’t need to seek others help with it, although there are those who feel some types of restrictions which are completely legit should be against an unwritten policy. Ridiculous. Chocolat Joanne Harris! You attorneys take the system being so biased towards you in many areas for granted and argument essay, don’t realize that anytime you actually win “on the merits” there’s a 50/50 that you only won “on a dumas policy” that was put into place so that you don’t btch too much about the parts of the joanne law that aren’t blatantly biased for writing programs you.

The only areas of the law that I can think of chocolat joanne off the top of my head that aren’t subject to introduction to thesis report some dumas policy or other are 102 and 103. They’re the most solid of our grounds of chocolat rejection because they’re basically the only portions of the law that haven’t been gutted by the courts. One on one, to the death. Actually the the design “job search” (which was just me responding to people seeking me out mostly) isn’t going anywhere atm, unless you consider people still seeking me out it going somewhere. I’ve been busy with working out and a few vid games and going out. I’m thinking maybe take the chocolat harris agents exam right fast, a bud of mine just did it and passed with only a few days o studying. Not to be mean to the guy but I kind of feel like I might be a little smarter than him, so I don’t think I should have that big of trouble with it. Thing is, 550$ for something I’m not completely sure I’m going to use?

Jebus, what a ripoff. “That particular attorney pi ssed me off by introduction actually successfully traversing a legit restriction.” Legit restriction —- hahahahahahahahaha. I don’t think I’ve seen a legit restriction, even following the examiner-friendly MPEP, in all my years of practicing. BTW — when I say legit restriction, I don’t mean that the “end result” was proper (i.e., the claims were properly restrictable), I mean that the examiner properly discharged the burden of establishing that these claims should be properly restricted. If the chocolat joanne harris essay attorney successfully traversed, then your restriction wasn’t legit. 6K — you problem (among many) is top creative programs, you think that everything you’ve been taught at chocolat joanne, the USPTO is correct.

You assume that because your primary, spe or next-door neighbor said this rejection was OK, then it must be OK. A good attorney (remember — you once aspired to join our ranks; btw — how’s that job searching going?) doesn’t rely on other people’s opinions. He or she may ask for an opinion, but when it is about an issue that he/she is unfamiliar, the good attorney will always verify first. Look at the MPEP for guidance, then look at the code, look at the rules, and look at the case law (and when I mean case law, I don’t mean the little one sentence snippets from the easy on summer MPEP). Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay! Only after you review of those sources should you proceed. Granted, most examiners (you included) are not particularly familiar with the MPEP, most of the case law, the rules, and the code, so you have to rely on your compadres at essay, the USPTO. However, as anybody who has played the “telephone game” can vouch for, as the essay message gets transmited from one person to the next, that message becomes garbled. Eventually, what I’ve seen from the examiner I deal with (and from you) is an top creative writing programs incomplete (at best) and/or incorrect knowledge of the law.

“If any of your 20 cases are available for chocolat harris public inspection, please post the serial number(s) as well as your take on the abuse.” As I said to MM, when you out yourself, I’ll consider outing myself. Actually, that question is rhetorical since I would never do it. Why do people ask such silly questions? Besides, any intelligent attorney isn’t going to want to comment on any of their pending applications. Anybody on this board ever hear of estoppel?

As if I’m going to ramble on top creative writing about one of my cases, opining about stu-pid references that 6K finds, but never gets cited by the USPTO. Like my clients (or anybody else’s clients) are going to appreciate that. Trust me, I would absolutely love to identify a couple dozen applications. Joanne! However, my duty lies with my client’s best interests … no matter how badly I want to shine a light on the USPTO’s incompetence. “Our job is not to ‘follow the law’ our job is issue applications that appear on examination to be entitled to a patent. And, as the courts repeatedly remind us, our job is post traumatic stress, also to issue only valid applications.” Only 6K would write this. Essay! Your job . IS. to follow the law … period.

The law states what you are to introduction to thesis examine, how you are to chocolat joanne harris examine, and what standards you are going to character analysis apply. Everything you do is based upon U.S. Code, U.S. case law, and the rules (properly) promulgated by joanne harris the USPTO (the USPTO has seem to forgotten how to properly promulgate rules these days). I don’t like getting political on these boards, but has 8 years of analysis essay Bush degraded the chocolat joanne ethics of the executive branch this much that even the peons like 6K feel that they are above the law? FYI 6K … if you ever get one of introduction my cases … please, I beg of you, write “my job is not to follow the law” anywhere within any of the chocolat joanne office actions you prepare. I will make that the centerpiece of any appeal I file. “Why would I feel sorry for these people? Who cares if the PTO ‘screws up’ these applications? The answer is that, except for certain crybaby gadflies, nobody cares because these inventions are crap.

If somebody actually cared the prosecution of the applications would be careful and argument essay, focused, from beginning to end, and beginning with the harris essay decision to on summer vacations not bother filing a patent application in the first place.” Your ability to consistently not get it is indeed remarkable. Obviously somebody cared about the prosecution of these applications. The applicants in harris essay, particular. That’s why they appealed them to the Fed. Cir. The fact that the PTO has been unable, despite numerous opportunities, to present prima facie cases against either application, demonstrates that, despite your personal feelings regarding the merits of the inventions, the applications are not crap.

Granted, the applications don’t disclose anything as ground breaking as the essay on summer protein fragments and chocolat harris, molecules that you apparently deal with, but as pds noted, the PTO’s handling of these cases is indicative of the lousy state of examination at programs, the PTO. Chocolat! That lousy state is only getting worse. I’m not above the law. “Power-tripping and deciding which parts of the law you like and follow and which parts of the law you don’t like and simply ignore IS a critical problem with the Office.” Says who? You.

Face me in one on one combat to essay the death. Maybe your fellows will learn something when I’m through with you. Send Donaldson if you like. “Our job is not to “follow the law” our job is issue applications that appear on examination to be entitled to a patent.” Um, Are you saying that you are to issue applications that appear on examination to be entitled to a patent by NOT following the Law’s rules on just what “entitled to a patent” means or how you are to perform the examination? No matter how much you like to think otherwise, you are NOT above Law. “The parts about “law” come into play only in essay, the context of about picnic a court room and in situations where there is a supposition that a court room might someday be visited.” “Only” you are wrong. I’m pretty sure that the joanne law should be applied during prosecution and that you do have to follow the law. Someone quoted Donaldson recently to that effect — something that the top creative programs courts also repeatedly remind you. Further, it is NOT your job to decide what is law and what is lawlol.

Power-tripping and deciding which parts of the law you like and follow and which parts of the chocolat harris essay law you don’t like and simply ignore IS a critical problem with the Office. If the offensive guard simply decides that he will be a receiver and the design argument essay, runs a post pattern, guess what – the play doesn’t count and your team is penalized. pds, excellent reminder to Malcom. Malcom, you are still stale. For the case you guys cited above, I’ve looked over the art and I have a hard time seeing why the previous rejections didn’t go to appeal on harris essay perusal. Introduction To Thesis! I haven’t looked at the smith reference yet, but the Julius ref is da rn near exactly what is needed and it clearly shows getting stuff out through the ho le in the top. “I don’t think you’re as bad as you make yourself out to be ;p” I’m not really, except in this case with the bgard claim they want rejoined. I will light that mo fo up with page upon page of rejections, none of which will involve art.

“Let me ask you an chocolat essay honest question though. Suppose that the character analysis handout claim is in condition for joanne harris essay allowance, but the post stress essay attorney pisses you off. Would you pass the case to allowance or would you bury the case in appeal?” It depends. So far I haven’t buried any apps in chocolat joanne, appeal that I truly believe are in condition for allowance. But, if the right attorney came along anything is within the realm of possibility. One particularly juicy case where I could have done this arose just this last week, I chose to issue. The case was not in condition for report allowance because the first ind blatantly covered things inherent to chocolat harris nearly all embodiments of on summer 1000’s of references of prior art but the chocolat joanne evidence just wasn’t there. The art was too unspecific to base a rejection on. But, that’s fine, some litigator can tank claim 1, the top creative writing rest of the inds are probably legit. That particular attorney pi ssed me off by actually successfully traversing a legit restriction.

The case should not have involved all that it ended up involving. Took probably 4 days to joanne essay search that sht the first time, and 2 or 3 after their amendments. “Instead, I think the Patent Office should actually have a slightly lower standard, where close cases should be decided in easy essay, favor of the applicant.” Thereotically, there would be 2 camps in USPTO management. Camp 1 would want to grant maximum authority to examiners. As such, the affirmation rate at the Board should be 100%, wherein examiners only send up clear cut rejections. The rest should be negotiated with the applicant and allowed. Camp 2 would want to grant minmum authority to examiners. Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay! As such, the affirmation rate should be close to the actual rate of allowable applications.

Perhaps 50%? Perhaps some other number reflective of the true allowance rate in view of the applications and the prior art? In discussing this with my colleagues, I have found folks in both camps as well as somewhere in between. Any comments on the USPTO’s official goal for appeal affirmation? I personally believe that the character analysis handout USPTO is joanne essay, only a first filter.

Some examiners go too far and reject all close calls. If examiners were to easy essay vacations allow all close calls and let the courts sort out the mess, the backlog would be greatly reduced, but the problem would then be directed to the courts. Not necessarily a bad thing depending whom you ask. One of my colleagues commented that patent reform is joanne harris essay, like playing chess in many different dimensions. You change one variable and the system reacts by character essay handout changing many related variables. “I promise you pds, you have never had to deal with the likes of me. If you had, you probably wouldn’t want to talk about it. We’d have to call you PTS from now on, for post traumatic stress.” I may have dealt with a few of your incarnations. I don’t think you’re as bad as you make yourself out to be ;p. “If an chocolat joanne harris essay applicant wants a patent that’s somewhat questionable, the Patent Office should err in favor of the applicant and allow it.

The examiner can make a record of the questionable nature of the patent (i.e., the claims may potentially be found obvious over…, etc.) in the file wrapper. Let the introduction patent holder beware; enforce with caution.” While I agree with most of joanne harris your comments, how do you feel about examiners creating file wrapper estoppels? “The first thing that would be required for top creative the case to wind its way to the Fed. Cir. would be you convincing the other appeal conferees that you could send the joanne essay case up to BPAI relying on disorder essay Official Notice. Very unlikely to chocolat joanne happen. Picnic! Not impossible, but highly unlikely.

Most likely (99.9+%) you’ll be told to re-open and cite a reference.” Some of joanne essay my own cases went to the design argument appeal with ON. How many would you require to overcome “highly unlikely”? “See MPEP 707.07(d): Nor should he or she (i.e. the examiner) express doubts as to joanne the allowability of allowed claims or state that every doubt has been resolved in favor of the applicant in granting him or her the claims allowed.” I am interested in comments about this issue as discussed above. “If you knew anything about In re Bogese and the law, you would now that it dealt with an EXTREME example of applicant abuse that isn’t even possible for any applications filed after June 8, 1995, after which the patent term changed from the design argument, 17 years from issue to 20 years from filing.

This case was about joanne harris dealing with “submarine” patents. Most aplicants do not want delay because of the top creative writing 20 years from chocolat joanne harris essay, filing patent term. For every “In re Bogese” case you can find over the last 10 years at the USPTO, I can look at my current docket (and mine alone) and introduction to thesis report writing, find you 20 examples of USPTO abuse.” I said directly that this is one, albeit extreme, case. I never said that it was representative of all cases. If any of your 20 cases are available for public inspection, please post the essay serial number(s) as well as your take on the abuse. “Stop sticking your head in the sand … the USPTO is essay about, anti-patents.” This is one of many instances where you attack me in chocolat joanne harris, some form. I simply asked for clarifications. If you don’t want to acquiesce, then you don’t have to reply.

“Your statement is just as much evidence as the examiner’s is right?” When both sides lack any real evidence, I suppose allegation from one is as good as allegation from the other. Let me ask you an honest question though. Suppose that the claim is in condition for allowance, but the attorney pisses you off. Would you pass the case to easy on summer allowance or would you bury the case in appeal? You don’t have to answer if you don’t want to. Chocolat Joanne! I was just curious. “So, this admission that the Office screwed up its job in not applying the Law and allowing bad patents is disorder, a rationale for changing the rules of the game? This is the chocolat essay rationale for STILL not doing your job and introduction, following the chocolat joanne harris Law?”

Yes and yes. Although your statement is off by a little bit, you must be mistaking us for some other agency. Our job is not to “follow the law” our job is issue applications that appear on about picnic examination to be entitled to a patent. And, as the courts repeatedly remind us, our job is also to issue only valid applications. That is the part that is difficult. The parts about “law” come into play only in the context of a court room and in situations where there is a supposition that a court room might someday be visited. Chocolat! If your app is so bad there is no chance, then don’t look forward to having the essay handout law looked at all that closely in regards to your application.

” The job’s too tough so let’s change the Law? Man up, fix the critical problem. The critical problem is joanne harris essay, NOT the Law” No, you’re right, the Law is not the problem. It is actually the disorder “lawlol” that is the problem. The lawlol has arisen from the courts. Like in KSR, those are mainly the things that need changing. Chocolat Joanne Harris! As soon as those get put back into good order, I predict that filing will go down to a reasonable level once attorneys get a firm grasp of essay picnic what they have a prayer at getting a patent on under the more restrictive lawlol to come. Essay! Examiners applying the Law are quite different from those applying the lawlol.

Just today I had my spe recommend a 112 1st on a claim that was an originally filed claim to make app put support in the spec So bad. I tried to explain to report him about harris how that’s not how 112 1st is current interpreted, but I don’t think he wanted to writing programs be wrong so I let it go. And, we have the personal assurances from Chief Judge M that things are a changin’ so that congress doesn’t have to lay the smack down. “Whoever invents or discovers any new and chocolat joanne harris essay, useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 35 U.S.C. 102 Conditions for patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent. A person shall be entitled to a patent unless —…”” Funny how your bicycle application appears to be anticipated by this reference clearly showing a steel beam. #128521; Lost your “rightlol” right there.

Sorry. “When you out yourself, I’ll consider outing myself. However, until all that happens, then we are stuck arguing about the patents/patent applications that Dennis provides us.” OH COME ON, borrow a juicy one from your buddy at the design argument, the office, I’m sure at harris, least one wouldn’t mind showing off a quality piece of work that is supposedly being stonewalled. I should add, the one app that I was afraid I might actually be stonewalling irl unjustifiably I recently found a 102b for. I consider myself vindicated. Mah trigger finger is itchy. “As I said before, you don’t practice before the USPTO.

I don’t care how many applications you have reviewed. Until you have to deal with the likes of 6K on a daily basis, you won’t understand all the unstated BS rules the USPTO employs.” Respectfully, as said above, I have prosecuted over 200 applications in classes 705 and 707. I was prosecuting before business method became its own TC. I deal with many examiners on a daily basis. “See the BPAI decision in 09/077,337 (pages 8-9, iirc). The Design Argument! All that is chocolat essay, required to traverse Official Notice is a demand that the about examiner support the chocolat joanne harris essay taking with substantial evidence.”

Based on my current dealings with the Board, I personally believe that they are 50/50 on ON traversal. I know some examiners that do not use ON at all. If the Applicant does not traverse, the easy vacations Board pretty much lets anything stick as admitted art. If the Applicant traverses in some form, then I think the Board is 50/50 depending on what documentary evidence the examiner furnishes. “Yes.

My experience is that every time an harris essay examiner takes Official Notice, I simply respond by easy essay on summer requesting that the examiner provide documentary evidence in support of the harris essay taking. I NEVER state, or even argue, why the facts noticed aren’t considered to be common knowledge. Why? Because I’m not required to. That’s why.” Even if the post essay MPEP had the effects of law, anything is appealable I suppose. I never said that the chocolat harris essay MPEP is 100% correct. I wanted different opinions on this particular topic and cited the MPEP as a source. Handout! If one assumed that I believe that the MPEP is chocolat joanne harris essay, 100% correct all the time, one would err. “My bad, I meant to cite: I thought a little bit more about the original point a claim with multiple interpretations being indefinite or definite.

As said above, natural language will always have some form of ambiguity. I also thought about the “broadest reasonable” standard. This implies that there may be more than one reasonable interpretations, and the examiner should adopt the broadest one for examination. Under this guise, a claim with two reasonable interpretations would only need to have the broadest interpretation addressed by the examiner. What happens if the two interpretations are equally broad? Any comment? I’m just thinking aloud. Essay On Summer Vacations! I neither agree nor disagree with any particular person. If you disagree with me please just ignore. “Since process clams are now required to be tied to a particular machine or transform a physical article to a different state or thing, are process claims indefinite if they can be performed in different physical locations and on different models of chocolat a particular machine? Also how does the insolubly ambiguous standard affect the no structure limitations rule in process claims?”

No, and there is no rule against structural limitations in a method claim so long as they are incorporated into analysis essay, the method step instead of recited by chocolat joanne harris essay themselves, so not at all. “As I said before, you don’t know the difference between holding and a dicta ” Actually I do, and I’m using the dicta. “If the claimed invention ecompasses obvious subject matter (i.e., the overlapping portion), then it doesn’t matter about the non-overlapping portion. Character Analysis! I know, I know … difficult concepts for you to comprehend when you already have your mind set on joanne your desired result.” I already comprehend this, and essay about, I go further. I’m probably going to harris have to investigate the essay cases that the chocolat harris court cites in their dicta and use one of those, but I bet this works out in my favor as I doubt the judge simply wrote his dicta without thinking what so ever. “The reason why (even MM) should care whether or not the PTO “screws up” is that if the USPTO screws up an (allegedly) crap application, then it is indicative that the the design essay USPTO will also screw up an chocolat harris important/valuable “flowery” application.” LOL. Yes, the USPTO screws up. Programs! But not nearly as often applicants screw up and it doesn’t matter how many comments you type up complaining about the USPTO that basic fact isn’t going to change. The behavior of applicants towards the PTO is about as senselessly greedy as Charles Manson trying every day and twice on Sunday to joanne harris essay get McDonald’s to deliver a custom-made Big Mac to San Quentin.

“A good measure of a fair government (and good law) isn’t how it treats the best, it is how government treats the worse.” The “worst” end up with thousands of top creative writing programs issued patents every year that they don’t deserve so the government is working quite well for chocolat “the worst.” If the USPTO were Homeland Security, half the janitors in the Pentagon would be working for the design al Qaeda. Chocolat Joanne Harris! The fact that some Afghani guy who can’t produce a birth certificate or provide any proof of picnic citizenship finds that his job application at joanne harris, Area 51 was “delayed” for an inexplicable reason is not a sign that the top creative writing programs “system” is essay, working against the public interest. “The answer is that, except for certain crybaby gadflies, nobody cares because these inventions are crap.”

JD … I was going to write that MM would say this, but it would have been only stating the “obvious.” The reason why (even MM) should care whether or not the PTO “screws up” is that if the USPTO screws up an (allegedly) crap application, then it is indicative that the character analysis USPTO will also screw up an important/valuable “flowery” application. The “perceived value” should not be the basis for how the joanne essay government evaluates a patent application. God knows, if MM ever gets arrested for essay about …. well, let’s not go there — this is a family message board …. Harris Essay! we would hope that the top creative writing government treats MM the same no matter his disagreeable nature and questionable character. A good measure of chocolat a fair government (and good law) isn’t how it treats the best, it is how government treats the worse. Either MM doesn’t care how the USPTO treats applicants or MM is post disorder, advocating that someone from government can arbitrarily decide what applicants deserve better treatment and what applicants do not. “But if you’d like to see an example of an “awesome” invention that is getting worked over by the PTO, check out 10/190,039. It’s a “simple” mechanical case. So simple that even somebody as mechanically inept as you can understand it.”

Uh, that’s an obvious piece of crap if I ever saw one. And the fishing pole case is just another example of an chocolat essay inept clueless patent drafter wanking off trying to get some o dat ol timey patent action. Why would I feel sorry for these people? Who cares if the PTO “screws up” these applications? The answer is that, except for certain crybaby gadflies, nobody cares because these inventions are crap. If somebody actually cared the prosecution of the applications would be careful and focused, from beginning to end, and beginning with the decision to easy on summer vacations not bother filing a patent application in the first place. Interesting case you cited. Classic USPTO. The BPAI affirms the chocolat joanne examiner’s 102 rejection. However, once appealed, the the design argument solicitor realizes that they are stuck with a bad decision and want to remand it. To be honest, once the essay USPTO asked for the remand, I knew they were going to get it.

The FC isn’t going to opine on something they don’t have to. I see that a final rejection has been issued after remand. Let’s see how the BPAI treats this knowing that they’ll scrutinized by the FC. “The last time I asked Teh Big Whiners here to provide some examples of their awesome inventions getting screwed over, we were presented with incredibly smelly and impossibly lame great great great great great grandchild of a continuation. I’m still waiting to see the good stuff.” The examples I provided met the argument essay exact criteria you specified. An objectively baseless rejection. Of course, faced with that proof, you changed the criteria. And then claimed that because the harris essay two examples had a large number of continuations pending, they were somehow disqaulified as meeting your request.

Although you never said anything about that in setting forth your initial request. Nor did you explain why the number of pending continuations had any bearing on easy essay why the particular rejections were not objectively baseless. Typical for you. But if you’d like to see an example of an chocolat “awesome” invention that is getting worked over by the PTO, check out 10/190,039. It’s a “simple” mechanical case. So simple that even somebody as mechanically inept as you can understand it. The rejections are appealed to post traumatic essay BPAI. BPAI affirms.

Case is appealed to joanne essay Fed. Cir. Appellant files brief. PTO requests a remand. The Design Argument! Acknowledges rejections that were affirmed by BPAI are POS. Typical PTO. Wait until the applicant/appellant has gone through the time and chocolat joanne harris essay, expense of briefing the case, and then admit all the work done by character essay handout the PTO up until that point is worthless garbage, and harris essay, request an opportunity for a do over.

Like I always say, the PTO considers it their right to have an writing unlimited number of chocolat opportunities to get it wrong. Check out page 12 of the (associate) solicitor’s 9/7/06 brief. Particularly the part where she claims that if the Fed. Cir. will remand she’ll personally monitor the argument application to make sure the case is expeditiously handled. The remand is granted. Chocolat Joanne Essay! 8+ months later another lame OA is issued. That’s certainly expeditious handling. Although it’s not publicly available in PAIR, check out the fishing pole application 10/899,352 (In re Wheeler) that’s discussed on the Patent Prospector site today. Anticipation rejection. Affirmed by BPAI. Reversed by Fed.

Cir. We’re now at the point where the PTO, and BPAI, can’t even establish a prima facie case of easy on summer anticipation against a fishing pole. Or recognize when the examiner’s case is chocolat, a complete POS. But there are no problems with objectively baseless rejections being issued by argument essay the PTO. Let me guess, these examples don’t qualify either. “I’m still waiting to see the joanne harris good stuff.”

When you out yourself, I’ll consider outing myself. However, until all that happens, then we are stuck arguing about the about patents/patent applications that Dennis provides us. “So, this admission that the chocolat joanne harris essay Office screwed up its job in not applying the Law and allowing bad patents is essay, a rationale for changing the rules of the game? This is the rationale for STILL not doing your job and following the chocolat joanne harris essay Law? Blame the applicants when the top creative writing programs Office doesn’t know and properly apply the Law?”

Wow, that’s some serious crybaby right there. News flash: e6k is a patent examiner, or at least he plays one here. Joanne Harris Essay! Unless you get off satisfying e6k’s sadistic tendencies, why get bent out of shape arguing with the guy? He can’t do dick to change the PTO. The last time I asked Teh Big Whiners here to provide some examples of their awesome inventions getting screwed over, we were presented with incredibly smelly and impossibly lame great great great great great grandchild of a continuation. I’m still waiting to see the good stuff. Execution, Execution, Execution, “PDS, remember, the reason we’re “anti-patent” aka would like fewer allowed patents, is because of the whole public getting pissed about stress essay too many blatantly obvious patents slipping through. Never forget that.” So, this admission that the Office screwed up its job in not applying the chocolat essay Law and the design argument essay, allowing bad patents is a rationale for changing the rules of the game? This is the rationale for STILL not doing your job and essay, following the Law? Blame the applicants when the Office doesn’t know and properly apply the disorder Law?

The job’s too tough so let’s change the Law? Man up, fix the critical problem. Joanne Harris! The critical problem is NOT the Law. “It’s not like all examiners follow the rules anyway.” HELLO – we have identified the problem. Know the post traumatic disorder law – do your job, stop the Power-grabbing, anti-patent campaigns. Chocolat Joanne Essay! Ethical abandonment to post stress essay force applicants to dance just because the Examiner can and harris essay, try to character analysis meet the Examiner’s expressed opinions that run counter to the Law: “35 U.S.C. 101 Inventions patentable. Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and essay, useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 35 U.S.C.

102 Conditions for disorder patentability; novelty and loss of right to patent. A person shall be entitled to a patent unless —…” We need a new Head Coach for this team… Since process clams are now required to chocolat joanne harris be tied to essay a particular machine or transform a physical article to chocolat joanne a different state or thing, are process claims indefinite if they can be performed in different physical locations and on different models of to thesis report a particular machine? Also how does the insolubly ambiguous standard affect the no structure limitations rule in process claims? “And your point is? If the art is chocolat joanne, good, no amount of MPEP is going to help you. It’s not like all examiners follow the rules anyway.” Herein lies the problem. The art is rarely good.

If the art is good, I usually don’t need an examiner to explain why it is good. The Design! Moreover, if the art is good, I’m not going to waste my time (and the client’s money) arguing. Instead, I’m going to amend or recommend that the application be abandoned. However, I rarely have to amend, and my recommendations for abandonment are few and far between. Instead, I’m stuck with examiners trying to put lipstick on chocolat joanne a sty full of pigs. This is where the analysis essay handout MPEP and plain, old case law help me to show the examiners the essay errors of their ways. If the programs examiners ignore the rules, then they will get appealed, and since (from my experience) a very large percentage of chocolat joanne harris applications I appeal never get an examiner’s answer, I would say that at least someone at the USPTO knows a solid argument when they see it. “Unlike you, I know the MPEP, and I know all the picnic goodies in it that are to applicants’ favor.” And your point is?

If the art is good, no amount of MPEP is going to chocolat joanne help you. It’s not like all examiners follow the rules anyway. “If applicant didn’t request documentary evidence, it probably would go to the design BPAI. If applicant did make a request, it would get re-opened and the examiner would be told, “Go find a reference.”” Well it didn’t in chocolat harris, my preappeal I just got through having the easy essay on summer other day. Appeal might follow so we’ll see. Of course, that applicant dropped his request after he made it one time and I refused him, citing the MPEP (and some Zurko iirc, since he cited some).

“I would imagine that 95% of the public thinks that patents are a good idea …” All of the “public” that I know of that aren’t serious applicants already who have done some homework think the patent system is a get rich quick lottery, or a way to make themselves feel “accomplished”. Joanne! That is if we’re not counting the ones that know they don’t know wtf it is and admit it. “In any event, I do hope that you can at least see that I am not relying on the judgement of obviousness for the overlapping portions of the ranges, but rather the judgement of character analysis essay obviousness of the not overlapping portions, i.e. the joanne essay actual different portions.” As I said before, you don’t know the difference between holding and a dicta … in fact, you probably think holding is something what occurs during a football game which causes a flag to top creative writing programs be thrown. “We agree, however, with the joanne essay Board that the disclosure in the McGill patent of writing a carbon monoxide concentration of “about 1-5%” does allow for concentrations slightly above 5%.”

Thus, Woodruff found that there was overlapping ranges. As for your distinction between overlapping/nonoverlapping portions, as I told you a couple of harris essay days ago, obviousness is the design argument essay, based upon the claimed invention, as a whole. If the claimed invention ecompasses obvious subject matter (i.e., the overlapping portion), then it doesn’t matter about the non-overlapping portion. I know, I know … difficult concepts for you to comprehend when you already have your mind set on your desired result. Regardless …. Joanne! you lose, yet again. “I promise you pds, you have never had to deal with the likes of me.” I’ve had to deal with far worse.

Although you are somewhat lazy, you aren’t entirely lazy. Some of the worst examinations are examiners who won’t explain anything. As for you, you would be EASY to take care of. You try to be a lawyer … and guess what? you aren’t, which means that you don’t understand case law, the difference between dicta and a holding, and your reading comprehension is the design argument, awful. Factual errors are harder to argue, but because you make so many legal errors, it would be easy to cut your arguments to shreds.

Heck, I would prosecute some of your cases for free … just for the fun of it … and I’m serious. Unlike you, I don’t shirk my responsibilities and take the easy way out. You would be bit-ching and moaning about me for weeks after you got my first response. Unlike you, I know the MPEP, and I know all the goodies in it that are to applicants’ favor. “PDS, remember, the reason we’re “anti-patent” aka would like fewer allowed patents, is because of the whole public getting pissed about chocolat too many blatantly obvious patents slipping through.

Never forget that.” Remember the old expression about “throwing the essay baby out with the bath water.” BTW — I doubt that even the most ardent of patent critics can name no more than a dozen of these “blatantly obvious patents.” Moreover, if they are blatantly obvious, my response is the following: (i) the examiner did a shi tty job and chocolat harris essay, (ii) request a reexamination of the patent. With over 7,000,000 issued patents, you are going to find some stinkers. Heck, with only a few thousand US patent examiners, we get the stinkers to about picnic show up on this board. As for the “whole public,” I guess most of those are (i) people who were afraid their Blackberries would stop working and (ii) the chocolat joanne harris essay open source crowd. I would imagine that 95% of the public thinks that patents are a good idea … however, the USPTO responds to the 5% squeaky wheels. “Also, why do you think an official notice wouldn’t make it through the board?”

If applicant didn’t request documentary evidence, it probably would go to BPAI. Essay About Picnic! If applicant did make a request, it would get re-opened and the examiner would be told, “Go find a reference.” “…just like you don’t say ‘a prima facie case of anticipation’. You could … but you just don’t.” I almost always note the examiner’s failure to establish a prima facie case of anticipation. It’s no different than obviousness.

Same with enablement, or written description. It’s good practice to cite the requirements for establishing a prima facie case, of whatever the issue is (e.g. obviousness, anticipation, etc.), and then explain why the examiner’s rejection fails to establish a prima facie case. “clear prima facie case of chocolat harris essay nonpatentability” Is a rejection under 112 even said to be prima facie under any circumstances? That seems out of place. Analysis! The only reason we use those words is for 103 iirc. You don’t say “a prima facie case of indefiniteness” just like you don’t say “a prima facie case of anticipation”. You could … but you just don’t. “Instead, I think the Patent Office should actually have a slightly lower standard, where close cases should be decided in favor of the applicant.” You should have made your name: Anonprosecutor2008. “Let the patent holder beware; enforce with caution.”

I would agree with you that the system should be changed to work thus, but the current system of chocolat joanne essay forcing them into top creative writing, having a patent that deserves a presumption of validity would require a complete overhaul by congress to accomodate such a change. “Bogese didn’t involve RCE’s. RCE’s weren’t available yet in Mr. Bogese’s time.” I didn’t say they were. Joanne Harris Essay! I said the only reason you have them is because the pto used its inherent authority to programs give you a gift. “RCE’s are the evolution of CPA’s, which were the evolution of FWC’s” Thanks for joanne essay confirming my point. Also, why do you think an official notice wouldn’t make it through the board? An Official notice made it through the character analysis board in your vaunted Zirko without so much as a second glance. And then it made it through the chocolat SCOTUS.

I’ve also seen the easy scattered willy nilly around decisions, they’re not easy to spot though, the court just skips over them and barely mentions it unless the applicant raises it as an issue. Chocolat! You could be right, some people might be told to reopen. It’ll depend on the simplicity of the notice taken most likely. “The examiner can make a record of the questionable nature of the patent (i.e., the claims may potentially be found obvious over…, etc.) in the file wrapper.” Can’t do that. Argument Essay! See MPEP 707.07(d): Nor should he or she (i.e. the examiner) express doubts as to the allowability of allowed claims or state that every doubt has been resolved in chocolat joanne, favor of the applicant in granting him or her the claims allowed. “Don’t forget that first step, it’s the part that counts.

It’s also the essay part JD will likely leave out, and chocolat joanne harris, be SOL because of.” I’ve never argued that an examiner’s statement is not substantial evidence. Argument! All I’ve ever done to traverse the taking of Official Notice is request the required documentary evidence. Works every time. “This is true that the examiner rarely requires him to. Harris! Because we’re an amicable lot. Personally I go through the trouble just to taunt them into appealing the matter to the CAFC.” Let’s see about that. The first thing that would be required for the case to wind its way to the Fed. Essay! Cir. would be you convincing the other appeal conferees that you could send the case up to BPAI relying on Official Notice. Joanne! Very unlikely to happen.

Not impossible, but highly unlikely. Most likely (99.9+%) you’ll be told to re-open and cite a reference. The next thing that would have to happen is you’d have to be affirmed by introduction to thesis writing BPAI. Okay, we can all stop laughing now. “You know what is funny JD? The only reason you EVEN HAVE RCE’s is because of the chocolat harris essay pto using its inherent authority pre-1952 to give them to you. Ungrateful self-entitled upstarts these old timers are.” Bogese didn’t involve RCE’s. Essay! RCE’s weren’t available yet in Mr. Bogese’s time. RCE’s are the evolution of CPA’s, which were the evolution of FWC’s.

The good thing about being an old-timer is you have some understanding of harris essay history. Mostly because you witnessed it first hand. I’m just responding to the original post, since I haven’t had time to read all of the comments yet. In short, I don’t agree with having a higher standard for 112 at the USPTO than the courts would use. The Patent Office is supposed to introduction to thesis report writing allow a patent application to issue as a patent unless the joanne harris resulting patent would fail to be enforceable. The Patent Office is post essay, therefore supposed to examine applications and should only reject those applications where there is a clear prima facie case of nonpatentability. So, the Patent Office is supposed to act as a filter that prevents patents from issuing that would otherwise be easily invalidated by the courts. In my opinion, if there is a reasonable chance that the courts would uphold a patent as valid, then the Patent Office should not be blocking its issuance.

Thus, in my opinion, the Patent Office should not have a higher standard than the courts for compliance with 112 (or any other statute). Instead, I think the Patent Office should actually have a slightly lower standard, where close cases should be decided in favor of the applicant. Unfortunately, the Patent Office has become more of an obstacle than it was intended to be. Examiners seem content to chocolat harris block a patent even where it’s a close call. Where applicants feel they can reasonably rebut such a borderline rejection, they refuse to give up and easy essay on summer, continue to pursue a patent.

As a result, examination of joanne each application takes longer than it should and essay about picnic, we are left with the current backlog. If an applicant wants a patent that’s somewhat questionable, the Patent Office should err in favor of the chocolat joanne essay applicant and stress disorder, allow it. Chocolat Harris Essay! The examiner can make a record of the the design questionable nature of the patent (i.e., the claims may potentially be found obvious over…, etc.) in joanne essay, the file wrapper. Let the patent holder beware; enforce with caution. “That MPEP section you cite is the introduction PTO’s made up nonsense. It has no force of law.” It does however have the force of 6k behind it. That force requires many $, and many months to joanne even attempt to overcome. And don’t worry JD, as soon as you challenge it as not having the force of law to essay the CAFC, it will have the joanne harris essay force of law. ‘See the BPAI decision in writing programs, 09/077,337 (pages 8-9, iirc).

All that is required to traverse Official Notice is a demand that the examiner support the taking with substantial evidence.” Thanks for joanne essay the citation JD, I figured you had that one on hand. JD knows this is the case where the attorney specifically stated that the examiners statement WAS NOT substantial evidence, and then incidentally demanded that he produce it. Don’t forget that first step, it’s the part that counts. Essay On Summer! It’s also the part JD will likely leave out, and be SOL because of. “Why? Because I’m not required to. That’s why” This is true that the examiner rarely requires him to. Because we’re an amicable lot. Personally I go through the trouble just to taunt them into appealing the matter to the CAFC.

PDS, remember, the reason we’re “anti-patent” aka would like fewer allowed patents, is because of the whole public getting pissed about chocolat joanne too many blatantly obvious patents slipping through. Never forget that. “Most aplicants do not want delay because of the to thesis writing 20 years from filing patent term.” She’s right about the “abuse” though. But by “abuse” cases she means “cases where I didn’t present an joanne harris application that appeared to be entitled to a patent”. It is really her fault and she doesn’t want to take responsibility for it. BTW, my first Miyazaki rejection passed my spe a few hours ago Amazingly I was not able to character raise the joanne essay issue in easy essay, two other cases, at least without really digging. Just goes to show, that case will not be the end o the joanne essay world even if it does cause some minor problems here and traumatic, there. “Yes. Bogese is the ONE case the PTO can cite.

From that, they have attempted to latch on to the “inherent authority” discussed by the court in the ridiculous power grab that was the claim examination and chocolat joanne essay, continuation rules. ” You know what is funny JD? The only reason you EVEN HAVE RCE’s is because of the pto using its inherent authority pre-1952 to give them to you. Ungrateful self-entitled upstarts these old timers are. “Regardless, how does one present evidence that the “noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art.” ” You might start by citing an obscure reference showing the noticed fact and vacations, stating you searched the relevant sub-classes and could not find a thing about it. Or, what I would do is state for the record that the fact noticed was not substantial evidence. Your statement is just as much evidence as the examiner’s is right? Though it’s probably not as substantial as the examiner’s #128521; “Until you have to deal with the likes of 6K on a daily basis, you won’t understand all the unstated BS rules the USPTO employs.” I promise you pds, you have never had to deal with the likes of me. Chocolat Joanne Harris! If you had, you probably wouldn’t want to talk about it. We’d have to call you PTS from the design argument essay, now on, for post traumatic stress.

I showed you guys that movie clip where me and chocolat, a handful of about picnic examiners fought off wave after wave of invading attorneys back in the day right? I’m going to put this simply so that you might stand a chance of comprehending it the second time I run it by you. When you’re done, you will have no doubt noticed that there are two issues inter alia. First there is the joanne essay issue of whether or not the ranges do indeed overlap. The court agrees with the board that they do because the top creative programs prior art teaches about 5% and the claim says more than 5% which encompasses 5.00000001% which is in the prior art. Then, moving to the next issue, there is the issue of whether or not patentability could be found in the difference of the joanne claimed ranges compared to the ranges in the prior art. The court then states: “Nor can patentability be found in the difference in carbon monoxide ranges recited in the claims. Introduction To Thesis Report! The law is replete with cases in which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the chocolat joanne harris claims.

See, e.g., Gardner v. TEC Sys., Inc., 725 F.2d 1338, 220 USPQ 777 (Fed.Cir.), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 830, 105 S.Ct. 116, 83 L.Ed.2d 60 (1984); In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980); In re Ornitz, 351 F.2d 1013, 53 CCPA 716, 147 USPQ 283 (1965); In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 42 CCPA 824, 105 USPQ 233 (1955). These cases have consistently held that in such a situation, the applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the prior art range. Programs! Gardner, 725 F.2d at 1349, 220 USPQ at 786 (obviousness determination affirmed because dimensional limitations in claims did not specify a device which performed and operated differently from the prior art); Boesch, 617 F.2d at 276, 205 USPQ at 219; Ornitz, 351 F.2d at 1016-17, 147 USPQ at essay, 286; Aller, 220 F.2d at easy, 456, 105 USPQ at 235. Woodruff has made no such showing in the present case. The only test results presented by Woodruff are the results reported by Mr. Bell, comparing Woodruff’s claimed invention to chocolat essay the commercial embodiment of McGill’s method. While Woodruff’s invention certainly showed superior fungi-inhibiting effect in these tests, the critical comparison is not with the commercial embodiment of McGill’s invention, but with the method taught in his patent. Programs! According to Mr. Bell’s declaration, the carbon monoxide concentration in the test group representing the commercial embodiment of McGill’s invention was allowed to drop to 0% after 4 days.

The McGill patent does not teach allowing the chocolat joanne harris concentrations of any of the gases to post stress disorder essay fall out of the suggested ranges.” I give applicants the presumption that they are relying on the difference between their claimed range and the inherent range of the chocolat essay reference even though it is easy essay vacations, not concretely known if there is a difference or not. If there was no difference then I would have to use overlapping range caselaw, or within the range caselaw. As is, it seems to joanne harris essay me the court is speaking to the difference between ranges. Considering that, is it improper to use Woodruff for a case that does not involve an overlap, and top creative writing programs, is it improper to chocolat joanne harris thus use the to thesis writing courts statements as above to say that the applicant must show criticality, rather than myself? In any event, I do hope that you can at least see that I am not relying on the judgement of obviousness for the overlapping portions of the ranges, but rather the judgement of joanne obviousness of the not overlapping portions, i.e. the actual different portions. pds observed, “Until you have to deal with the the design argument likes of 6K on chocolat joanne essay a daily basis, you won’t understand all the argument essay unstated BS rules the USPTO employs.”

I could not agree more. The USPTO has no apparent desire to allow claims that are remotely close to the boundaries of patentable subject matter to which applicants are entitled. Chocolat! They too often reject based on essay gut feelings about harris what may or should be prior art and, as a result, rely on mediocre references and less than mediocre rationales, if any. Anyone with any amount of experience before the USPTO knows that the they will reject until the overly narrowed claims can survive a challenge based on their imagined prior art. The U.S.

Patent and Trademark Office has decided to stop releasing its annual list of the top 10 organizations receiving the most U.S. patents. “In ceasing publication of the top 10 list, the USPTO is emphasizing quality over quantity by discouraging any perception that we believe more is better,” says Patent Office deputy director of public affairs Brigid Quinn. “For the past four years, USPTO has focused on the quality of the patents it issues. The Design Essay! We are now seeing the results of those efforts. Last year, patent quality was the best in over 20 years, and joanne harris, the agency also had the lowest rate of to thesis report patents approved in more than 30 years. We didn’t want to trump that by turning around and putting out a top 10 list that glorifies quantity over quality, where quality is really the focus.” In a world were R#038;D is ever-expanding; where new forms of technology are being discovered literally every day; and where there is chocolat harris essay, natually more discovery than there ever was before (based simply on a greater population), the USPTO has decided that less patents is better. Stop sticking your head in the sand … the USPTO is anti-patents. “When countered with the abundance of allegation of USPTO stalling, I believe this adds one more piece to the puzzle; sometimes the applicants themselves stall prosecution.” If you knew anything about picnic In re Bogese and the law, you would now that it dealt with an harris essay EXTREME example of disorder essay applicant abuse that isn’t even possible for joanne harris essay any applications filed after June 8, 1995, after which the patent term changed from 17 years from issue to 20 years from introduction report, filing. This case was about dealing with “submarine” patents. Most aplicants do not want delay because of the 20 years from filing patent term. For every “In re Bogese” case you can find over the last 10 years at the USPTO, I can look at my current docket (and mine alone) and find you 20 examples of USPTO abuse.

Can you clarify why your comments are relevant to my questions about 112 2nd? My bad, I meant to cite: “In my experience, I have never seen an practitioner try to ‘specifically point out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action, which would include stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art.’http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/documents/2100_2144_03.htm” Nobody123, the reason you’ve never seen any practitioner state why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge is because that is joanne essay, not a requirement to traverse the programs taking of Official Notice. That MPEP section you cite is the PTO’s made up nonsense. It has no force of law. See the BPAI decision in 09/077,337 (pages 8-9, iirc). All that is chocolat essay, required to traverse Official Notice is a demand that the analysis essay examiner support the taking with substantial evidence. “At most, the best I’ve seen is chocolat harris essay, some kind of blanket traversal without any explanation. Can anybody chime in with their experience?”

Yes. My experience is that every time an examiner takes Official Notice, I simply respond by requesting that the character analysis handout examiner provide documentary evidence in support of the taking. I NEVER state, or even argue, why the facts noticed aren’t considered to be common knowledge. Why? Because I’m not required to.

That’s why. “While we may consider the MPEP, being drafted by the USPTO, to be self-serving and essay, of course would not address torts committed by the USPTO, I believe that at least one instance of applicant/practitioner stalling exists.” Yes. Bogese is the ONE case the PTO can cite. From that, they have attempted to latch on to the “inherent authority” discussed by the court in the ridiculous power grab that was the character analysis handout claim examination and continuation rules. Mr. Toupin was actually bold enough to cite Bogese to the Fed. Cir. He barely got the case cite out of his mouth and was immediately shot down.

“the USPTO requires an EXTREMELY narrow and lengthy claims” “Can you cite any specific guidelines for chocolat joanne harris this? Is this conclusion gleaned from post stress disorder essay, experience or did you actually get this from a USPTO representative?” As I said before, you don’t practice before the USPTO. I don’t care how many applications you have reviewed. Until you have to deal with the likes of 6K on a daily basis, you won’t understand all the chocolat essay unstated BS rules the USPTO employs.

In my experience, I have never seen an practitioner try to disorder “specifically point out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action, which would include stating why the harris essay noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art.” Because that language was recently added to the MPEP and the MPEP is not binding law. The Design Argument Essay! The reference to 37 CFR 1.111(b) is prefaced by “see” which means there is joanne harris, no literal support for character handout their requirement, they are just hoping that their requirement can been “seen” from essay, this rule. Argument Essay! Regardless, how does one present evidence that the “noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art.” You are trying to prove the non-existence of something. “Looks like you responded to just about everything except my actual woodruff citation, way to go pds.” What I wrote is that “Proving the criticality of a range is only necessary AFTER the chocolat essay examiner has established a prima facie case of obviousness based on introduction report overlapping ranges (see MPEP 2144.05(B)(III)).” In the case where the claimed ranges “overlap or lie inside ranges disclosed by the prior art” a prima facie case of harris obviousness exists. In re Wertheim, 541 F.2d 257, 191 USPQ 90 (CCPA 1976); In re Woodruff, 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.

1990) (The prior art taught carbon monoxide concentrations of essay handout “about 1-5%” while the claim was limited to joanne harris essay “more than 5%.” The court held that “about 1-5%” allowed for concentrations slightly above 5% thus the ranges overlapped.) As such, I addressed Woodruff (i.e., overlapping ranges for establishing a prima facie case). Top Creative Programs! 6K — you really need to work on your reading comprehension. David wrote:: “The heart of harris essay patent examination is in sections 102 and to thesis writing, 103. Other sections – 101, 112, etc. – are SUPPOSED to be fairly low thresholds of formality and competence.” But have you *seen* some of the … that gets filed these days? Even a fairly low threshold could trip some of our fellow practitioners. “Ah, nothing like the stale scent of sanctimonious drivel to start the week.” Lovely to see that you noticed the slight sent your way.

Instead of, once again, adding a meaningless comment that in no way advances the conversation, why don’t you think about why the joanne harris scent is so stale? Perhaps you’d realize that the staleness is because your comments by and large have been so meaningless for so long that in the event that you actually have something worthwhile to add, bored (sic) readers simply see that the post belongs to you and either. a) ignore out of hand. b) get a whiff and then ignore the contents as more of the same useless pontificating. d) with seeming futily, try to give you candid advice that you yourself are too sanctimonius to consider let alone act upon. “I’m a little unclear on what you’re saying by “it already doesn’t exist, or, more specifically, that it exists, but that it is never proper”. What is “it”? ON? In my experience, I have never seen an practitioner try to “specifically point out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action, which would include stating why the noticed fact is not considered to essay be common knowledge or well-known in chocolat harris essay, the art.” At most, the best I’ve seen is vacations, some kind of blanket traversal without any explanation. Can anybody chime in with their experience?”

ON=official notice. That’s the topic of the chocolat joanne harris essay conversation dude. Yes I could show you a case where they did properly traverse, JD knows which one it is programs, but I don’t remember the chocolat joanne essay app no. Anyway, pds already stated her position for analysis handout you. She’d get rid of it and joanne essay, she doesn’t like it because she’s grumpy, or probably just igno rant. She claims it is misused, but it is probably properly used but she just doesn’t have knowledge akin to common knowledge in her arts. If I say usuing LED’s in argument essay, flashlights is old and well known as of 2005, they’d traverse the chocolat essay fact. I know that guy lol. See him all the introduction to thesis writing time still but don’t talk to him often. He’s a character, I’m surprised he didn’t make a joke about the allowance rate. “I have never seen any representative from the chocolat joanne USPTO state that their goal is character essay handout, zero allowance.”

There are a few examiners who will admit this to you though. Joanne Essay! It is usually only in specific AU’s, not for the office as a whole. I can introduce you to examiners who will tell you they can’t allow but maybe 7 patents a year barring some really convincing cases popping up. “When countered with the analysis essay handout abundance of allegation of USPTO stalling, I believe this adds one more piece to the puzzle; sometimes the applicants themselves stall prosecution.” I know of a case on my docket where that is happening. I keep daring them to appeal, practically begging. Chocolat Joanne! But they just will not do it. They’ll change the claims in some way that still reads directly on the art already applied and file another RCE.

We’re coming up on no. 3 iirc. I used to give them first action finals, but my new boss doesn’t like us to do that if they amend at all. Ridiculous policies. First action finals are there to reduce applicant heeing and hawing. So far as I can see there is argument essay, no other reason for them to exist.

“A refreshing read of essay exchanges here on the board without the usual useless noise of easy essay on summer vacations personal attacks, excrement and other fluff.” Ah, nothing like the chocolat essay stale scent of sanctimonious drivel to start the week. I just want to writing throw in harris, one last thing tonight. The MPEP talks about prosecution laches: “The Federal Circuit affirmed a rejection of claims in introduction to thesis report writing, a patent application on the ground that applicant had forfeited his right to a patent under the doctrine of chocolat joanne harris prosecution history laches for disorder unreasonable and undue delay in prosecution. In re Bogese, 303 F.3d 1362, 1369, 64 USPQ2d 1448, 1453 (Fed.

Cir. Joanne Harris! 2002) (Applicant “filed twelve continuation applications over an eight-year period and did not substantively advance prosecution when required and given an opportunity to stress disorder essay do so by chocolat joanne essay the PTO.”).” While we may consider the MPEP, being drafted by essay on summer the USPTO, to be self-serving and of course would not address torts committed by the USPTO, I believe that at least one instance of chocolat joanne essay applicant/practitioner stalling exists. When countered with the abundance of allegation of character analysis USPTO stalling, I believe this adds one more piece to the puzzle; sometimes the applicants themselves stall prosecution. “Ahh … gee whiz … how about this.

You are asking these questions and you don’t know what the USPTO’s “take” is. ” These links you posted fall under 101. To the best of chocolat joanne harris my understanding, the USPTO is applying this decision by requiring method claims to pass the “machine or transformation” test. All other facets of 101 prior to this decision remain intact. Can you clarify why your comments are relevant to my questions about 112 2nd? “And as most applicants will tell you, I’ve rejected it as a terrible idea. In exchange for a faster allowance, the USPTO requires an OVERWHELMING level of applicant-led examination and EXTREMELY narrow and introduction report, lengthy claims. Chocolat Joanne Essay! As any litigator will tell you, this type of claim is utterly useless for enforcement. And it’s not even a guarantee! The applicant’s request for accelerated examination may well be rejected by the USPTO, leaving the applicant with very expensive preparation costs for top creative writing programs a narrow application that STILL isn’t examined for six years.” Can you address specifically to joanne harris which part of the required documentation you object?

While I agree this is more work for the practitioner, the USPTO recommends mapping claim limitations to the best art with a table checking which art teaches which limitation. From a strategic perspective, assuming you get approved, this program put extreme pressure on the Corp to crank out final disposition within 12 months. While I acknowledge that pre-exam for analysis program qualification is rigorous, once you get approved, the examiner is required to search the disclosed invention, as opposed to a mere suggestion by the MPEP: “Both claimed and unclaimed aspects of the invention described in the specification should be searched if there is chocolat harris essay, a reasonable expectation that the unclaimed aspects may be later claimed” The accelerated exam program requires examiners to picnic identify allowable subject matter in the specification, if any, as opposed to leaving the essay examiner to character essay determine “if there is a reasonable expectation that the chocolat joanne harris essay unclaimed aspects may be later claimed”. Additionally, since the examiner is under pressure to post disorder move the case, and because the applicant bears additional burden search requirements on chocolat essay top of the duty to disclose known art, can the examiner be less accountable for identifying allowable subject matter? I mean that the examiner could be less gun-shy because the traumatic stress essay applicant bears more of a burden for a bad allowance. The examiner also has less time for searching. Would these be good reasons for an examiner to allow a case? “the USPTO requires an EXTREMELY narrow and lengthy claims” Can you cite any specific guidelines for this?

Is this conclusion gleaned from experience or did you actually get this from joanne essay, a USPTO representative? Respectfully, I find your assertion not to be supported anywhere in the MPEP. In fact, the MPEP says to essay about picnic reject unduly long claims as prolix: “Claims are rejected as prolix when they contain long recitations that the metes and bounds of the chocolat harris essay claimed subject matter cannot be determined.” Could you clarify? “The applicant’s request for accelerated examination may well be rejected by the USPTO” I agree that acc. exam. requests are processed by argument special examiners, but in my review of these cases, the special examiner clearly sets forth the errors for denying acc. exam. status so that the practitioner can correct the deficiencies. In 100% of these cases, I have found that the chocolat harris request is later approved when the deficiencies are corrected. What has been your personal experience? “leaving the applicant with very expensive preparation costs for a narrow application that STILL isn’t examined for vacations six years.”

I think this is harris essay, highly dependent on the art. While it is report writing, true that pendency for chocolat harris essay first action is 6 years in about, some areas, I know several areas where the backlog is practically gone. As said above, it seems like we’re using the worst of the bunch to chocolat joanne harris essay represent the group. Can you comment? “It’s a terrible idea. That’s not just my conclusion: out of 500,000 apps filed in introduction report writing, 2008, only 1,400 – about chocolat essay 0.3% – were petitioned for accelerated examination.” I neither agree nor disagree with your conclusion. Based on my experience, some of the post traumatic disorder practitioners I spoke with do not know that the accelerated program even exists. We would need more evidence why 99.7% do not file. Without more evidence, I am not comfortable saying that failure to enter the program amounts to chocolat essay a conscious value judgement on the program by picnic the applicant/practitioner. “The Office needs to stop power grabbing and essay, thinking about changing the playing rules and start focusing on playing as the rules are.

If you are bad at American Football, don’t try to change the easy essay game to what the world calls football (and what we in the States call soccer), get a new coach and practice, practice, practice. If the General Manager/Owner does not want to hire a stellar coach, or obtain talented players, insisting on drafting raw talent that will take years to develop, then there can be no surprise that the chocolat harris team will suck in the design argument, the short to mid term.” I think the biggest problem is the chocolat joanne harris essay pay scale. Argument! A lot of chocolat examiners, especially attorneys, leave because of character analysis low pay. Unfortunately the pay scale cannot be raised until the examiner’s union is joanne harris essay, disbanded. Like the auto industry, they live and die by easy essay the union. I personally believe that the best way would to harris essay give the examiners pay raises. That way, the good ones won’t leave. Second, examiners should be given strict examining guidelines drafted by OPLA.

This will ensure uniformity so that the practitioners will know exactly what to expect, and perhaps it will rope in rogue examiners as well. “Because these things have been used to limit our claims and hence hurt our clients.” How would you balance getting an introduction to thesis writing allowance in the first place with unduly limiting the claim scope? It seems that trying to do one affects the other. “Fewer filings: John Love (Deputy Commissioner for the USPTO) talked about the goal of reducing applications at this year’s “Partnering in Patents” program. So did John Whealan (Deputy GC and Solicitor for the USPTO) during his address at the AIPLA Annual Meeting two months ago. And “fewer filings” is the stated intent of the hard-pushed-for continuation rules. Joanne Harris! Etc.” Respectfully, this is not the impression I got from John Love or any of essay his representatives.

I was there for the 10/22/2008 Partnering in Patents presentation. I listened very intently during John Love’s speech. I do not recall him saying that his goal is to reduce filings. Would you happen to have a transcript or something like that? Perhaps I was tuning out for a moment and harris essay, did not fully comprehend his comments. “Fewer allowances: Did you see this chart from my post? That chart shows plummeting allowance rates – historically low, in essay about picnic, fact.

And that slide came from this report – – in joanne, which the USPTO slaps itself on the back for easy having met its primary goals for 2006… which centrally includes reducing the allowance rate. That trend (and that goal) continued in 2007 and 2008. Here is this year’s report – – in which the chocolat joanne harris essay USPTO again applauds itself on achieving a historically low 47.3% allowance rate.” I am not sure I would characterise the USPTO in the manner you did. If you recall, during the on summer Pet Peeves portion of the 10/22 meeting, the Bar’s chief complaint was the allowance rate. Robert Kim for the USPTO responded by saying that “we allow what is allowable”. I personally would characterise the USPTO as citing the reason for low allowance rates to be: a) the subject matter in view of the prior art, and b) the quality of the applications. In my opinion, this perspective is more consistent with everyone from the USPTO that I spoke with about the allowance rate. They seem to joanne harris blame the applicant for the allowance rate.

Although it may be true of some individual examiners, I have never seen any representative from the USPTO state that their goal is zero allowance. Specifically, I would like to respond to this comment: “http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/06-73.htm. – in which the USPTO slaps itself on the back for having met its primary goals for 2006… which centrally includes reducing the post traumatic disorder allowance rate.” In that report, the USPTO acknowledges the low allowance rate: “At 54%, the chocolat joanne patent allowance rate was also the lowest on top creative record.” I did not see any direct patting on the back. Chocolat Joanne Essay! Could you please clarify on what leads you to conclude this? “it is essay handout, exactly counter to the stated desires of the current USPTO administration” Can you cite explicitly where your assertion comes from? “So why does the USPTO want to squelch patent filings? Great question. I have some answers for you, if you want them.”

Please share. Chocolat Joanne Essay! I am very curious. “There’s a sort of tribal warfare going on among the examining corps, USPTO administration, the easy vacations CAFC, patentees, and the public… and everyone is losing.” I will agree with you there. I noticed that the push for chocolat joanne business method quality in easy essay, the early 2000s was met with lower allowance rates. Now it seems like the pendulum wants to swing the other way.

Perhaps we want less quality and more allowances, and chocolat, let the courts sort out the claims? Is this what you want? “On that we can agree, except that there are likely outstanding members and less good members of both catagories. Sometimes I get the feeling that many of us on this board are perhaps some of the more outstanding ones and we’re always btching that the suc ky members, that presumably make up the majority, of the opposite catagory suc k. And we’re probably right.” I agree. We shouldn’t judge a group based on the worst member. “His proposal is writing, that it already doesn’t exist, or, more specifically, that it exists, but that it is chocolat joanne, never proper. Of course this is outrageous, but, if we’d had to put up with as many bad ON as he probably has, we’d probably feel the same way.” I’m a little unclear on what you’re saying by “it already doesn’t exist, or, more specifically, that it exists, but that it is never proper”.

What is “it”? ON? In my experience, I have never seen an practitioner try to “specifically point out the supposed errors in the examiner’s action, which would include stating why the noticed fact is not considered to be common knowledge or well-known in the art.” At most, the best I’ve seen is some kind of blanket traversal without any explanation. Can anybody chime in easy on summer, with their experience? “I think if you have test data to prove unexpected results it is patentable. for the chocolat harris limited ranges bookended by the prior art, that is.”

I believe you are 50% correct. According to the MPEP, criticality, including unexpected results, may be used to rebut the prima facie case of obviousness: link to uspto.gov. I would be hesitant to say that the claim would be patentable because assuming the best reference is on summer, applied: a) the rebuttal may not be germane if the art is anticipatory, b) the rebuttal is not sufficient to under MPEP 716.02 and subsections thereunder: link to uspto.gov. and/or c) the chocolat joanne harris essay claim is not statutory. I would agree that establishing criticality correctly would/should overcome prima facie obviousness.

Whether the claim is analysis essay, allowable depends on other factors. Fair? “Attorneys say that Exrs “h=te searching” while Exrs say that attorneys decline to joanne say what the invention is, and easy essay on summer, how can they do a proper search until they know what it is.” I have a feeling that practitioners are reluctant to create file wrapper estoppels by unduly limiting the claim scope during prosecution. Joanne Harris! Examiners are reluctant to allow claims that may have broader claim scope during enforcement than the scope adopted during prosecution. Is this true?

“I have never known an examiner to evince consternation that the MPEP or unwritten patent office policy prevented them from rejection a claim they felt was unclear for failing to meet the writing requirement of 112 2nd paragraph.” I know there was some grumbling prior to this decision: link to patentlyo.com. Some examiners were of the chocolat joanne essay opinions that 112 sixth limitations directed towards computer related inventions should be rejected under 112 second if the specification does not clearly set forth the the design special purpose computer with special algorithms embedded therein. Chocolat Joanne! Other examiners believed that the limitations should be interpreted broadly to encompass pure function, and essay handout, could be addressed by functional art. The first group believed that the joanne claim is indefinite while the second believed that absent any assertion from the practitioners, any 112 sixth limitation should be interpreted to envelop any structure capable of performing the recited functionality. I’ve seen actions go both ways and it appears that there were some internal struggles between these two groups.

“the depth and breadth of ignorance and – even more clearly – inexperience clearly evident in many of the the design essay comments on this point does not bode well for the future of the chocolat harris essay patent system, and likely indicates the reason there are so many bad ideas being given undue credance in the largely misguided debating going on regarding the essay picnic USPTO and patent reform” In general, or are you referring to any specific points raised on this blog, or this thread in particular? “A refreshing read of exchanges here on joanne the board without the usual useless noise of character handout personal attacks, excrement and other fluff. Thank you especially to Nobody123 – your input smacks of reason, applied intellect and a certain openness to a healthy exchange of chocolat essay views.” Thank you. Because I am fairly inexperienced compare to introduction some, I am rather unbiased towards either side. I should add, the only app that I have had go to preappeal with a off notice used in the case so far ended up amending around the off notice and essay, getting slapped with a reference for character analysis essay handout his more narrow claim anyway. Joanne Harris Essay! Btw, that preappeal is going to appeal. Or, more likely, RCE. “(after your SPE beats you down, yet again, for traumatic disorder essay your abuse of joanne taking official notice) ” I have never had such a thing happen.

I’ve made an easy essay vacations “improperlol” combination of two pieces of AAPA. And I’ve also made a “proper” but “against policy” restriction. The only two fish to get away from joanne essay, me yet. I probably could have still gotten the restriction one but I decided to be generous, i.e. throw them into limbo where their app will ro t for another 5 mo (it has been 5 already). Essay! They had to pay the appeal fee already.

Even if they did file an appeal, it would probably be improper because the whole problem with the app is an improper restriction, which is only petitionable. The 112 rejection based on the application having no claims left is 100% proper if the restriction stands. I haven’t decided yet if I should drag my feet until they have to file an actual appeal, and chocolat essay, then watch as it is deemed improper. Do you have a position on this? Like I would ever suggest an amendment “to save face”. Keep dreaming. Hah, I hardly make a suggestion when you pathetic attorneys come begging for one. The only thing I’d do “to save face” is another couple of google searches and write you up a 102b.

Which is what I did in the app with the “improper” AAPA combination. I should also add, the reason I made that AAPA combination was because my old boss gave me the ok. If I didn’t have a new boss the case would probably have gone to introduction report writing appeal. I really ha te changing bosses. Always a new policy. And they ALWAYS start out wanting me to get with them for interviews. Slowly they realize that I have a lot of interviews and it is to their benefit to harris let me handle the small fish.

Looks like you responded to essay just about everything except my actual woodruff citation, way to go pds. “due to harris managerial incompetence they cannot keep up with the filing increase which makes them look bad — so the alternative is to squelch patent filings” Yep, that’s one of the clear-cut answers. For whatever reason, the USPTO cannot bail itself out of its backlog, so it wants a vast reduction in filings. (I think this is criminally irresponsible for three reasons: 1) Issuing patents is, um, the primary function of the USPTO. Any procedural change that involves “arbitrarily reducing patent issuances” is a flagrant violation of the USPTO’s CENTRAL PURPOSE. It’s like asking a doctor to save fewer of the patients that he treats, or asking a policeman to arrest fewer criminals.

2) We have a MASSIVE and growing unemployment problem in the U.S. – particularly in high-tech areas! The USPTO can *definitely* hire its way out of writing programs this problem, particularly now! And at the same time, the USPTO gets to create jobs that help the economy… and with the bill footed by patentees! Why the hell the USPTO doesn’t see this is chocolat joanne essay, beyond me. 3) Regardless of how many of essay handout its self-serving “goals” it meets every year, the fact remains that USPTO management has *abysmally* failed to fix the central problems with the chocolat harris essay institution.

It is attempting to shift the attention – and blame – to greedy patentees and unethical practitioners in an attempt to easy on summer shield itself from hard-hitting questions that it can’t answer.) But I think that “fewer applications” is only half of the explanation for the USPTO’s position. Does anyone else wonder about the USPTO’s obsessive interest in “patent quality” (despite the complete nebulosity of that term?) From 1996 to about 2005, the chocolat joanne harris essay USPTO gained a certain level of easy public visibility as patenting came into vogue. Chocolat Essay! Unfortunately, a lot of introduction that PR was negative. Amazon’s “OneClick” patent and the RIM vs. NTP cases generated a ton of bad political press. The open-source software community decided to use its “kum-ba-yah” mojo to demonize the patent system – largely as a foil against sworn enemies like Microsoft. And everyone loved weighing in chocolat joanne essay, with half-baked opinions on how to “fix” the patent system, citing lame patents like “method of training a cat with a laser pointer” and “method of swinging a golf club.” At that juncture, the post USPTO had some options.

It could have stood up for itself and essay, its examiners. It could have educated the public about the practicalities of the patent system (particularly for software), and explained why “OneClick” wasn’t the debacle it seemed. To Thesis Writing! It could have stood its ground as THE skilled entity in declaring patentable subject matter. Instead, the USPTO suffered a catastrophic spine failure. Harris! It caved to public pressure. The USPTO chose to respond, “you’re right, we suck… and it’s ALL THEIR FAULT!” – pointing at applicants and the patent bar.

Thus began the report current era of warfare between patentees and – well, everyone else… with the opposing charge centrally led by chocolat essay the USPTO! Why did it choose this route? Frankly, I don’t know. But I view it as a first-order betrayal of the writing interests of its customers, and of the central mission of the patent office: to ISSUE PATENTS. David — btw, nice comments, again. “Can you comment more on what this “take” is? Please feel free to post links and provide citations for further research.

Thanks.” Ahh … gee whiz … how about this. You are asking these questions and you don’t know what the USPTO’s “take” is. “Just to clarify, are you in effect proposing that we get rid of Official Notice altogether?” I don’t mind the chocolat harris proper use of it, but it is the improper use of it that is the problem. Still I would get rid of it. If an examiner wants to easy essay vacations take Official Notice of something, just find a reference. Chocolat! If you cannot find a reference, then the examiner shouldn’t have taken official notice. As for the rest of your comments … honestly, they are minor issues.

If the examiner has personal knowledge, then force the post traumatic examiner to prepare an affidavit executed under the penalty of law. I’ll agree to that because the examiner is joanne, less likely to fudge the facts. As for citing references after the filing date for stress disorder a “universal fact,” then again, I don’t care. If it is a “univeral fact,” then it would be inherent in the prior art, so again, it really doesn’t matter. “It goes something like “The applicant has not established the critical nature of chocolat joanne harris *range x* and since “It is argument essay, common for the difference between the prior art and the claimed invention to be some range or other variable, in such circumstances the applicant must establish the criticality of the claimed range”.”

Thanks for proving that you don’t know how to properly apply the case law. Proving the criticality of joanne harris essay a range is disorder essay, only necessary AFTER the examiner has established a prima facie case of chocolat joanne harris essay obviousness based on overlapping ranges (see MPEP 2144.05(B)(III)). If you don’t have an overlapping range, you have to show an art-recognized, result-effective, variable. So many examiners cite that “criticality” bs language without realizing that the BURDEN is on about picnic THEM. Lazy, incompetent; lazy, incompetent; lazy, incompetent – two ways of describing an examiner. “Furthermore, what would stop me from taking official notice of the claimed parameter being known to chocolat harris essay be result effective” Nothing. You have already long-established that you don’t care about introduction report writing following the essay law. However, if you take official notice, I’ll traverse, and then I’ll take it to appeal.

However, it won’t ever make it to the BPAI, because you’ll be reopening after the the design appeal conference (after your SPE beats you down, yet again, for your abuse of taking official notice) or calling me in an attempt to harris essay offer up some amendment that will allow you to save face. “or simply alleging implicitness to analysis handout the reference maybe backed with some rational sciencespeak” Good luck with that. I absolute LOVE when an examiner tries that BS. Make sh it up … the classic examiner’s response to not finding good art – instead of allowing the application.

the proposal is good or bad….err…it depends on when “insolubly ambiguous” is considered to be reached. So uncertain …just as the “insolubly ambiguous” itself. …by now folks are experienced enough to hit the joanne harris essay note RIGHT…everytime …:) by the character handout way…the proposal would, for sure, lower the standard… “So why does the USPTO want to squelch patent filings? Great question. I have some answers for you, if you want them.” due to managerial incompetence they cannot keep up with the filing increase which makes them look bad — so the alternative is to squelch patent filings. “”The USPTO wants exactly two things at this point: (1) Applicants to file fewer applications, and.

(2) Examiners to allow a very small percentage of filed applications.” Do you have any evidence of joanne harris essay this?” Nobody123, the top creative writing USPTO openly admits both of these goals. So, yes, I have heaps of evidence. Fewer filings: John Love (Deputy Commissioner for the USPTO) talked about the goal of reducing applications at harris essay, this year’s “Partnering in Patents” program. So did John Whealan (Deputy GC and Solicitor for the USPTO) during his address at the AIPLA Annual Meeting two months ago. And “fewer filings” is the stated intent of the hard-pushed-for continuation rules. Etc. Fewer allowances: Did you see this chart from my post?

That chart shows plummeting allowance rates – historically low, in traumatic stress essay, fact. Joanne Harris Essay! And that slide came from this report – – in which the USPTO slaps itself on the back for having met its primary goals for 2006… which centrally includes reducing the essay picnic allowance rate. That trend (and that goal) continued in chocolat joanne harris essay, 2007 and 2008. Character Analysis Essay! Here is harris essay, this year’s report – – in which the USPTO again applauds itself on achieving a historically low 47.3% allowance rate. “From a management objective, if I were a manager for the USPTO, I would want: (a) Applicants to file as many applications as possible, and. (b) Examiners to allow as many filed applications as possible (with adequate quality of course).” That’s a very logical and straightforward thought. Unfortunately, it is exactly counter to the stated desires of the current USPTO administration. Yes, I agree with you that this is nonsensical. Introduction To Thesis! Economists look at joanne harris essay, high rates of patent filings and issuances as an indicator of economic health. And of course, the rise in patent filings over the last 30 years closely matches the increasing rate of vacations corporate R#038;D investment, which is sort of logical.

So why does the USPTO want to squelch patent filings? Great question. I have some answers for you, if you want them. “Do you have statistics on the quality of the applications being rejected?” Of course not – and neither does anyone else. The “quality” of any particular patent is essay, impossible to quantify. It requires a detailed assessment of the state of the art (including technology, law, and business), the essay vacations magnitude of the problem solved, the ingenuity of the solution, the completeness of the chocolat harris essay description, the clearness and breadth of the claims, the commercial value and uses of the patent, etc. “Patent quality” is an character entirely subjective term. If you ask an chocolat essay examiner, a USPTO official, a patentee, a technologist, and a CAFC judge what “quality” means, you’re likely to the design essay get five (or more!) different answers – all legitimate, but all incomplete, and often contradictory (breadth vs. narrowness; assertive and creative claiming vs. clear allowability.) The bottom line is that “patent quality” is a red herring. Everyone who uses the chocolat joanne essay term simply does so to push an agenda that suits his or her particular interests.

That’s why we’ve had so many “patent reform” initiatives – and writing, no consensus. Of course, this lack of consensus has caused the misery and chaos apparent in the patent system today. Harris Essay! There’s a sort of tribal warfare going on among the examining corps, USPTO administration, the CAFC, patentees, and the public… and everyone is losing. “Have you considered the accelerated examination program?” Of course. Introduction! And as most applicants will tell you, I’ve rejected it as a terrible idea. In exchange for a faster allowance, the joanne essay USPTO requires an OVERWHELMING level of applicant-led examination and EXTREMELY narrow and lengthy claims.

As any litigator will tell you, this type of claim is utterly useless for enforcement. And it’s not even a guarantee! The applicant’s request for accelerated examination may well be rejected by stress disorder essay the USPTO, leaving the applicant with very expensive preparation costs for a narrow application that STILL isn’t examined for six years. It’s a terrible idea. Chocolat Joanne Harris! That’s not just my conclusion: out of 500,000 apps filed in 2008, only 1,400 – about 0.3% – were petitioned for accelerated examination. MaxDrei, I always enjoy your comments. I too have been impressed with Obama’s choices so far and post essay, have great hopes for the PTO. Regarding incentives: it is true that U.S. Chocolat! patent attorneys have been backing off from specificity in various ways lately.

Each time we get slammed for a practice, we try not to top creative writing do that anymore. So now we can’t say “what the joanne harris invention is”, we can’t discuss prior art in detail, we can’t have objects of the invention (except perhaps one very broad one). Because these things have been used to limit our claims and hence hurt our clients. I don’t know the answer, but I do recognize that it’s a problem. Dennis (and readers) I’m simply gobsmacked by the quality of Obama’s science appointments (Harvard’s Holdren the most recent). Seen from the design, Europe, the contrast with the last 8 years could not be starker. But can he match that quality, in his patent appointments? I bet he can. Well, Noise, I should think that the imperative is to write simple, robust, logical, fair Rules of Play that command respect, so that all players who don’t respect the spirit of the Rules know that they are going to essay get short shrift.

I’m not at vacations, all sure that the Rules of joanne essay Patent Play, in the USA, meet that criterion. But then I would think that, wouldn’t I, because I’m looking over from another playing field. I find that Americans think the Rules of Cricket are crazy, whereas the cricket-playing nations of the world, in Europe, Africa, Asia and The Americas, worship them. A refreshing read of exchanges here on introduction to thesis writing the board without the usual useless noise of personal attacks, excrement and other fluff. Thank you especially to Nobody123 – your input smacks of reason, applied intellect and a certain openness to a healthy exchange of chocolat joanne harris views. I do not think that you are misreading the tendency here in the States for writing a “vague as possible” initial filing, but I do believe that your mission to make the US adopt Europe practice is still misguided. We simply have a different system with different basic operating rules which carry different consequences. For example, our system is set up for a give and take during prosecution. Your idea of “Belated attempts to clarify should carry consequences so adverse as to make the risk too great…” would simply unbalance our system and is in fact unnecessary amd indeed harmful. Chocolat Harris Essay! Our law already has provisions to accomplish the intent of top creative writing what I believe you seek (e.g., no new matter can be introduced, Section 112 in each of its paragraphs). I recognize that you believe that you are trying to make our system better, but I believe that you are contributing to the noise which makes it actually difficult for people here to focus on chocolat joanne harris what needs to about be focused on.

The Law is chocolat joanne harris essay, good. The Law does not need to be changed (at least to solve the most critical problem). We need to execute to the Law and perform. The Office needs to stop power grabbing and thinking about changing the playing rules and start focusing on playing as the character handout rules are. If you are bad at American Football, don’t try to change the game to what the world calls football (and what we in the States call soccer), get a new coach and joanne, practice, practice, practice.

If the General Manager/Owner does not want to hire a stellar coach, or obtain talented players, insisting on essay about picnic drafting raw talent that will take years to develop, then there can be no surprise that the team will suck in the short to mid term. (1) One anon commentator above had it right – Examiner’s do NOT use this standard. They can and do rejected claims whenever they find them to be not clear and definite. We get all kinds of 2nd paragraph rejections, of – naturally – varying insightfullness. The bar to joanne harris essay second paragraph rejections during prosecution is not high at all. Indeed, I have never known an examiner to evince consternation that the MPEP or unwritten patent office policy prevented them from rejection a claim they felt was unclear for failing to meet the programs requirement of chocolat joanne essay 112 2nd paragraph. Usually rejections of this type are resolve by report writing rewording the claim, or explaining them on the record in writing in way that creates an estoppel to arguing differently should litigation arise and the claims have to be constued.

(2) The standard referred to derives in part from the presumption of validity, and it is only one piece of judicial doctrine relating to the interpretation of chocolat joanne essay ambiguous claims. Another aspect is that – where there are several ways to resolve a clear ambiguity and one or more permit it – courts should construe claims to handout preserve validity. (3) Anyone who spends much time communicating – whether in the manner of claims drafting, other types of writing, speaking or in harris essay, any other way, knows that it is impossible to remove all ambiguity from a communication. Writing! And – as a matter of fact – claims ambiguity is very very rarely a reason that litigation arises. (4) Frankly, the depth and breadth of ignorance and – even more clearly – inexperience clearly evident in many of the comments on this point does not bode well for the future of the harris essay patent system, and likely indicates the reason there are so many bad ideas being given undue credance in the largely misguided debating going on regarding the USPTO and patent reform. So, Dennis, since this thread is for teaching purposes, I will be provocative. Attorneys say that Exrs “h=te searching” while Exrs say that attorneys decline to say what the invention is, and how can they do a proper search until they know what it is. To get out of this bind doesn’t need rocket science.

Attorneys are pragmatic, and put the character essay handout interests of joanne harris essay their clients, the inventors, top. What if it is in the interests of inventors to get clear the definition of essay their invention, no later than when filing the app. Belated attempts to joanne clarify should carry consequences so adverse as to introduction report writing make the risk too great, of filing with a diffuse (at best) statement of what is the chocolat harris essay contribution to the art. Except in the USA, attorneys strive (in the argument essay interests of their clients) to get as correct as possible, already in the WO document, the definition of what the invention is. One has the harris feeling that, in the USA, the opposite perception is prevalent, that it is in the interests of introduction to thesis report client to be as vague as possible, when writing the app, about everything except the illustrated embodiment. Those who must rely on clearance opinions based on joanne harris essay WO publications. Governments have a duty to find ways to force filers to be clear, to promote the progress of essay about industry, and its capacity to offer gainful employment to those who want to work, also in the USA, the land of the patent lottery. for the chocolat joanne essay limited ranges bookended by the prior art, that is. I think if you have test data to programs prove unexpected results it is patentable. “In my limited experience, I believe that examiners and practitioners commit substantially similar amounts of chocolat joanne essay these errors.” On that we can agree, except that there are likely outstanding members and less good members of both catagories.

Sometimes I get the feeling that many of us on this board are perhaps some of the on summer vacations more outstanding ones and we’re always btching that the suc ky members, that presumably make up the majority, of chocolat harris essay the opposite catagory suc k. And we’re probably right. “Just to clarify, are you in easy essay on summer vacations, effect proposing that we get rid of Official Notice altogether? ” His proposal is that it already doesn’t exist, or, more specifically, that it exists, but that it is never proper. Chocolat Joanne Harris! Of course this is outrageous, but, if we’d had to put up with as many bad ON as he probably has, we’d probably feel the same way. “How do you feel about stress disorder KSR rationale E, “obvious to try”, in terms of limited ranges bookended by the prior art?” That is one that would seem to be valid, but then there’s also the rational about prompting variations. This is my FP that me or a primary made. “the applicant has not established the critical nature of joanne harris essay ” ” and since “The law is replete with cases in post disorder, which the difference between the claimed invention and the prior art is some range or other variable within the claims … In such a situation, the chocolat harris essay applicant must show that the particular range is critical, generally by showing that the claimed range achieves unexpected results relative to the design argument essay the prior art range.” In re Woodruff 919 F.2d 1575, 16 USPQ2d 1934 (Fed. Cir.1990). Therefor it would have been obvious to joanne harris …” It is actually from Woodruff and argument, that doesn’t seem to be talking about optimization of chocolat joanne harris ranges.

It is talking about when there is a difference between the ranges shown in the ref and in the claim. I merely presume that there is implicitly a range in the reference if there is no explicit one, and give the app the benefit of the doubt that theres is easy on summer, different from the implicit one in the ref. This portion from Aller seems to set out the difference between optimization of ranges, and the mere non-criticality of ranges. “Normally, it is to be expected that a change in joanne essay, temperature, or in concentration, or in both, would be an unpatentable modification. The Design! Under some circumstances, however, changes such as these may impart patentability to chocolat harris a process if the particular ranges claimed produce a new and unexpected result which is different in top creative, kind and not merely in degree from the results of the prior art. In re Dreyfus, 73 F.2d 931, 22 C.C.P.A., Patents, 830; In re Waite, 168 F.2d 104, 35 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1117. Such ranges are termed “critical” ranges, and the applicant has the burden of proving such criticality. In re Swenson, 132 F.2d 1020, 30 C.C.P.A., Patents, 809; In re Scherl, 156 F.2d 72, 33 C.C. P.A., Patents, 1193. However, even though applicant’s modification results in great improvement and utility over joanne harris, the prior art, it may still not be patentable if the modification was within the capabilities of one skilled in introduction, the art. In re Sola, 77 F.2d 627, 22 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1313; In re Normann, 150 F.2d 708, 32 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1248; In re Irmscher, 150 F.2d 705, 32 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1259.

More particularly, where the general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to harris discover the stress essay optimum or workable ranges by essay routine experimentation. Easy! In re Swain, 156 F.2d 239, 33 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1250; Minnesota Mining #038; Mfg. Co. Chocolat Essay! v. Coe, 69 App.D.C. 217, 99 F.2d 986; Allen v. Coe, 77 U.S.App.D. Essay! C. 324, 135 F.2d 11.”

All in all, I believe Woodruff is correctly applied in such a situation. “Furthermore, what would stop me from taking official notice of the chocolat joanne harris essay claimed parameter being known to be result effective, or simply alleging implicitness to the reference maybe backed with some rational sciencespeak.” How do you feel about KSR rationale E, “obvious to essay about picnic try”, in terms of limited ranges bookended by the prior art? “If a claim term could be interpreted two different ways, and one skilled in the art would recognize the metes and bounds of those two different ways, then it is chocolat joanne harris essay, OK. If an top creative examiner thinks it is too broad, the examiner interprets the harris claim both ways and introduction to thesis, finds art that reads on one of those ways … this will force applicant to narrow the claims.”

I think this is a very good point. I spent the last several days thinking about your comments. In one case, the claim recites “dated information”. Neither the chocolat joanne harris essay specification nor the arguments asserts a controlling definition. The examiner applied a reference teaching timestamping data as anticipatory of this limitation.

The attorney argued that the reference does not teach checking the post stress timestamp because “dated” means that the information is old, i.e. outdated. It took me several times, but I found that “dated information” could mean both: a) information with a datestamp, and b) information that is old and currently invalid. With your comments in mind, I wasn’t sure what would be the correct remedy for this case. Should this claim be rejected under 112 2nd? pds, first I would like to thank you for chocolat harris essay responding directly to my comments. “your reliance on the MPEP is nice, but please realize that although it is essay picnic, supposedly a manual for examiners to use. Most have not picked one up or read it. Most attorneys (should) know the MPEP far better than an examiner.”

I know that it would be very difficult to joanne harris quantify, but in your personal opinion, on a scale of 1-10 (1 being not at all, 10 being everything) how well do you think most examiners understand chapters 700 and 2100? “Your Euro spelling indicates to me that you aren’t familar with the nitty-gritty that has gone on easy essay vacations with the USPTO the current decade.” I have reviewed and scrutinised the prosecution history of several thousands business method cases for my firm. I was involved in prosecuting several hundred of these applications. As you know, these cases were only in existence for the past decade.

While I don’t have as much experience as some of the practitioners on here, with all due respect, I feel that I am as familiar with business method prosecution as any junior practitioner could be. Fair? “Any patent prosecutor wouldn’t doubt that assertions that you question because their is ample evidence that the USPTO is hostile to patents, inventors, and practitioners.” Respectfully, while I have seen my fair share of essay mistakes committed by the Corp, because I review prosecution histories, I oftentimes also spot attorney practises that I view as “errors”. In my limited experience, I believe that examiners and practitioners commit substantially similar amounts of essay picnic these errors. I believe that this perspective depends on whom you ask. Practitioners blame examiners. Harris Essay! Vice versa. See above for evidence of essay this. With all due respect, the premise is that one would view one’s own work as flawless and that all mistakes are committed by the opposing party.

This self-serving perspective is natural and understandable. Chocolat Harris Essay! With this premise, what would we find if we hypothetically reviewed some cases and try to essay on summer vacations determine practitioner and examiner errors? “FYI — the USPTO providing their own policy “take” on 35 USC 112 is an impermissible delving into substantive law.” Can you comment more on what this “take” is? Please feel free to post links and harris essay, provide citations for further research. Thanks.

“How could that examiner have a reasonable basis without evidence? The USPTO’s (mis)use of taking Official Notice is picnic, simply an excuse not to find evidence. Moreover, Official Notice should only be taken when the fact being noticed is so easily recognized as “common knowledge” that it is beyond dispute. However, if an examiner cannot find such a reference to support the chocolat harris essay examiner’s position, then it hardly can be considered “common knowledge.”” Just to clarify, are you in effect proposing that we get rid of Official Notice altogether? If you require that all notice facts be supported by essay about evidence, then why institute this practise at all? Is this what you want? “30-40 years ago, when it was much harder to chocolat joanne essay find references, some of this BS may have been OK. However, in today’s information age, there should be little excuse for not finding the reference beyond laziness” I tend to agree; however, how do you feel about the quality of the search when you make the haystack bigger?

What would you consider to be a reasonable search? “BTW — I don’t care whether an examiner “knows” he or she saw the disorder teaching somewhere else but cannot find it again. People keep forgetting that the prior art is chocolat harris essay, limited by applicants’ priority date. As such, if the reference is not **PRIOR** art, then the reference cannot be relied upon. Just because the essay on summer examiner saw it before doesn’t mean it is PRIOR art.” Respectfully, I see the comingling of two separate issues in joanne essay, your comments: 1) the to thesis examiner’s personal knowledge should not qualify as prior art, and. 2) reference must predate the priority date to joanne essay be considered prior art. To the first point, how do you feel about 37 CFR 1.104(d)(2)? “When a rejection in an application is based on facts within the top creative writing programs personal knowledge of an employee of the chocolat harris Office, the data shall be as specific as possible, and the reference must be supported, when called for by the applicant, by the affidavit of such employee, and post disorder, such affidavit shall be subject to contradiction or explanation by the affidavits of the applicant and other persons.” As to the second point, how do you feel about MPEP 2124?

“In certain circumstances, references cited to show a universal fact need not be available as prior art before applicant’s filing date.” “So — how do you handle a Markush claim?” Markush’s are fine. The claim cannot necessarily be “interpreted” two different ways it just is joanne, two+ different ways. The claim itself is programs, still the same thing, just because it branches doesn’t mean the claim is joanne harris, able to be interpreted multiple different ways. The Design Essay! You are confusing the standard “well you can go down this path or this path” with “well you could possibly read this as letting you go down this path or you could possibly read this as letting you go down this path”. One is a distinct unambiguous instruction that the claim covers two+ things. The other is an ambiguous openendedness that might, or might not allow for the claim to joanne essay cover two different areas of subject matter.

This isn’t hard, you’re smart enough to argument understand this. The decision is chocolat joanne harris essay, a horrible thing for top creative writing prosecutors having to wrestle with it, and bad applications of it. Like where xmnr above just got through confusing indefiniteness with breadth. (Just as JD predicted some examiners would I might add) But, on joanne harris the whole, it is a wonderful thing for the patent system if we can get the difference between the two worked out well amongst the folks applying it. “How could that examiner have a reasonable basis without evidence?” This is known as “reality” pds, you should totally check it out essay about sometime. “However, if an chocolat essay examiner cannot find such a reference to support the examiner’s position, then it hardly can be considered “common knowledge.”” In all honesty I might would agree with you there, but a learned man by the name of Alex Greenspun has looked into the matter. In his inquiry he found that indeed, the more simple a subject is, and the more common sensical the subject is, the writing harder it is to find in the academic literature.

While this is harris essay, not true in every case of every simplistic thing, he does have a point. The Design! You can look up his page easily. If it wasn’t for the tendency for mistakes to be made off notice would be a more powerful tool. Imo, it should be made statutory, like judicial notice. Funny that you would accept a random judge’s notice but not an chocolat harris expert in post disorder, the given field’s off notice, which a good number of joanne harris essay primaries/Spe’s are.

“FYI — the USPTO providing their own policy “take” on character analysis 35 USC 112 is an impermissible delving into substantive law.” FYI — the USPTO just following suggestions from the Fed Circ isn’t. “It only speaks volumes about us when you admit that what you are doing is egregiously wrong.” I will make that trade. Also if you “took it to the mat” I’d throw you in a turk faster than you can say bob’s your uncle following it up with a half ftw.

Presuming you’re not too fat to perform those teqs on. Also presuming you’re not a girl. To something important: “”I use range caselaw against claims that say …” I know range caselaw quite well … I have a lot of pre-written arguments for use against poorly reason arguments. In fact, I cannot recall one time when an chocolat essay examiner properly establish that a particular variable was an argument art-recognized, result-effective, variable per the case law cited in 2144.05(II)(B) (a prerequisite for chocolat joanne harris essay applying In re Aller). Ok, so you admit that saying “greater than x” is just another way of claiming the range x+.00000000001` through infinite? Where did you see something that makes a result effective variable etc be a prerequisite to Aller in total? Looking to your section it seems it is the section on “optimization of ranges” citing “”[W]here the traumatic stress disorder essay general conditions of a claim are disclosed in the prior art, it is not inventive to discover the optimum or workable ranges by routine experimentation.” In re Aller, 220 F.2d 454, 456, 105 USPQ 233, 235 (CCPA 1955) ” as the In re Aller citation. I usually do not use that particular citation, but I think my citation is from joanne essay, In Re Aller. It goes something like “The applicant has not established the character essay handout critical nature of *range x* and since “It is common for joanne harris essay the difference between the traumatic prior art and the claimed invention to be some range or other variable, in such circumstances the applicant must establish the criticality of the claimed range”. I think that was from chocolat joanne, Aller but I’ll have to check at the office.

This particular citation of on summer Aller is not in the “optimization of ranges” portion of the MPEP and does not seem to speak to joanne the optimization of ranges. So do you think those prereq’s apply to this as well? If so, why? My citation is not discussing the writing optimization of joanne ranges, but rather the opposite. The citation I am using is alleging that the the design essay applicant has done nothing more than change the ranges, and has failed to joanne show an optimization, or criticality of the ranges, at all. Furthermore, what would stop me from taking official notice of the claimed parameter being known to be result effective, or simply alleging implicitness to the reference maybe backed with some rational sciencespeak. makes sense to me: pds writes: “xmnr got it perfectly.

The way to handle broad claims is with the top creative programs “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard. If a claim term could be interpreted two different ways, and one skilled in the art would recognize the metes and bounds of chocolat joanne those two different ways, then it is OK. Character Analysis Handout! If an examiner thinks it is too broad, the examiner interprets the harris essay claim both ways and finds art that reads on one of those ways … this will force applicant to narrow the claims. The tool is already in place to go after “overly broad” claims. 112 2nd paragraphs is about whether the claims are vague versus indefinite — not whether or not the claims are broad.” As to PTO policymakers, the PTO does not consist of only examiners and the BPAI. There is an Office of Intellectual Property Policy and Enforcement (OIPPE) that works with Congress and USTR on policy issues. (link to uspto.gov) OT, not sure if this was posted, but Dennis, thought this was interesting…some good proposals in the Chamber of easy essay on summer vacations Commerce recommendations to incoming administration re USPTO. (tried to link to the pdf but didn’t show up in preview):

No. The entire suite of recent rule changes and internal “quality” initiatives by the USPTO are self-serving and detrimental to future US competitiveness in chocolat harris, the global marketplace. “Dennis should give out top creative writing programs grades if people answer the question. I suggest 0 points for anon. 1 for grasping that the joanne PTO has real-world incentives that have little to do with substantive patent law; -1 for arguing without explanation that LOWERING a hurdle to patentability will be used as “a weapon to reduce the number of applications.” That right there is one of the picnic best posts that I, Gideon, have ever read on this Blog. I would, however, suggest that the “real world incentive” answer be given much greater weight. The RWI answer is like the Rosetta Stone. Get the mush heads away from thinking about everything from the perspective of chocolat Learned Hand. Analysis Essay Handout! Instead, have them assume the chocolat harris essay perspective of Joe6PackExaminer.

“Dennis should give out grades if people answer the question. Essay! I suggest 0 points for anon. 1 for grasping that the PTO has real-world incentives that have little to do with substantive patent law; -1 for arguing without explanation that LOWERING a hurdle to patentability will be used as “a weapon to joanne harris reduce the character number of applications.” That right there is one of the best posts that I, Gideon, have ever read on this Blog. I would, however, suggest that the “real world incentive” answer be given much greater weight. The RWI answer is like the Rosetta Stone. Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay! Get the mush heads away from character essay, thinking about chocolat everything from the perspective of Learned Hand. Instead, have them assume the perspective of Joe6PackExaminer. “Dennis should give out grades if people answer the question. I suggest 0 points for writing programs anon. 1 for grasping that the PTO has real-world incentives that have little to do with substantive patent law; -1 for arguing without explanation that LOWERING a hurdle to patentability will be used as “a weapon to reduce the harris number of applications.”

That right there is essay about, one of the best posts that I, Gideon, have ever read on this Blog. I would, however, suggest that the “real world incentive” answer be given much greater weight. The RWI answer is chocolat joanne harris essay, like the Rosetta Stone. Traumatic Stress Disorder! Get the mush heads away from thinking about everything from the perspective of joanne harris Learned Hand. Instead, have them assume the perspective of Joe6PackExaminer. “Dennis should give out grades if people answer the question. I suggest 0 points for anon. 1 for grasping that the PTO has real-world incentives that have little to do with substantive patent law; -1 for arguing without explanation that LOWERING a hurdle to patentability will be used as “a weapon to reduce the number of analysis applications.” That right there is one of the best posts that I, Gideon, have ever read on this Blog.

I would, however, suggest that the “real world incentive” answer be given much greater weight. The RWI answer is like the Rosetta Stone. Get the mush heads away from thinking about everything from the perspective of Learned Hand. Instead, have them assume the chocolat perspective of post stress disorder Joe6PackExaminer. No offense to chocolat harris the drafter of this exam question, but what does it do to obectively test or challenge the student’s ability to apply existing law to real problems that real clients would have? Not much, in my humble opinion.

Unfortunately, far too many law school exams are like this. First of essay on summer all, your reliance on joanne harris the MPEP is nice, but please realize that although it is essay, supposedly a manual for examiners to use. Most have not picked one up or read it. Most attorneys (should) know the MPEP far better than an examiner. Your Euro spelling indicates to me that you aren’t familar with the nitty-gritty that has gone on with the USPTO the joanne harris current decade. Any patent prosecutor wouldn’t doubt that assertions that you question because their is ample evidence that the USPTO is handout, hostile to patents, inventors, and practitioners. FYI — the USPTO providing their own policy “take” on chocolat essay 35 USC 112 is an impermissible delving into easy, substantive law. “Nonetheless, if the Examiner has a reasonable basis that some art exists and such existence amounts to ‘common knowledge’, how do you feel about responding to the Official Notice?” How could that examiner have a reasonable basis without evidence? The USPTO’s (mis)use of taking Official Notice is simply an excuse not to find evidence. Moreover, Official Notice should only be taken when the fact being noticed is chocolat, so easily recognized as “common knowledge” that it is writing programs, beyond dispute.

However, if an examiner cannot find such a reference to support the examiner’s position, then it hardly can be considered “common knowledge.” 30-40 years ago, when it was much harder to chocolat essay find references, some of this BS may have been OK. However, in today’s information age, there should be little excuse for not finding the reference beyond laziness. BTW — I don’t care whether an essay examiner “knows” he or she saw the joanne harris essay teaching somewhere else but cannot find it again. People keep forgetting that the easy essay on summer vacations prior art is limited by chocolat joanne harris applicants’ priority date. As such, if the reference is not **PRIOR** art, then the reference cannot be relied upon. Just because the examiner saw it before doesn’t mean it is PRIOR art.

“So what? You haven’t told the public that which you claim if you claimed two different things.” So — how do you handle a Markush claim? Ooooo … that puts the kibosh on your rationale, amiright? “Speaks volumes about you doesn’t it?” It only argument essay, speaks volumes about us when you admit that what you are doing is egregiously wrong. Chocolat Harris Essay! Plus, I’ve already stated why we don’t take you to the mat when the the design argument (ample) opportunities present themselves. “I use range caselaw against claims that say …”

I know range caselaw quite well … I have a lot of pre-written arguments for use against poorly reason arguments. In fact, I cannot recall one time when an examiner properly establish that a particular variable was an art-recognized, result-effective, variable per the case law cited in harris, 2144.05(II)(B) (a prerequisite for applying In re Aller). “Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, draft crappy computer-implemented garbage, whine, whine, whine, whine.” MM — I didn’t realize you drafted computer-implemented claims in addition to all your whining. Unlike you, I get claims allowed all the time. Picnic! Moreover, I get computer-implemented claims allowed ALL the chocolat joanne time. BTW: the biggest whiner on this board is you.

You whine about everything. You aren’t interested in engaging in any kind of real legal discourse. Every time I’ve tried to do that with you, you’ve backed away. Understandably, it is easy to post your BS arguments when you don’t have to support them with the law, common sense, logic, or a good policy rationale. However, as Harry Calahan once said … “a good man knows his limitations” … and you are limited by your inability to engage in a reasoned, intellectual discourse. Any, so stick with your trolling … it is post traumatic disorder, what you do best. “(1) Examiners simply aren’t permitted to allow many applications, because USPTO management has decided to throttle allowance rates to absurdly low levels.” What’s the reason behind that?

Because we’re stuck in the stone age of chocolat examinerejectexaminereject. Essay! It should be examineconsult applicantallow. Why do I say this? A friend of mine has around a 90% allowance rate. How does he do this? LET”S MAKE A DEAL MO FO!

I however am constrained by the more traditional approach that many advocate, the ol’ rejectresponserejectetc. That said, “Let’s make a deal” looks more attractive every day. Harris! The general rule, as I understand it, to “lets make a deal” is to try to essay vacations make a deal to get some subject matter in the claims that at least stands a snowballs chance in heck at being valid, and voila, you have yourself a first action allowance. I should add that his production is chocolat harris essay, through the roof. Of course, doing three/4 actions per bi week and barely ever dealing with a final/af is hardly a chore. Either way, there is a lesson to be learned from his examining style. If you present valid claims that also APPEAR VALID you will likely get a first action allowance.

“If you cannot find the art, then you cannot reject the claim.” Double dog dare me? Show me an app of traumatic stress disorder yours, I’ll see if I can get it xfered to me. “The way to handle broad claims is with the essay “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard” What does that have to do with a claim that has two equally broad interpretations that contradict one another? Nothing. uR DuM 3 k? ” If a claim term could be interpreted two different ways, and one skilled in the art would recognize the about picnic metes and bounds of those two different ways” So what? You haven’t told the public that which you claim if you claimed two different things. Joanne Harris Essay! Don’t try to post stress disorder essay fight this pds, you know as well as anyone that claims regularly cause no end of trouble because what they claim can’t be concretely determined. Don’t pretend a poshita always knows that both ways of interpreting the claim are equally valid either, they may very well not be.

Besides, as you well know, poshita can barely even read claims, as noted in Marksman. They need you lawyers to do that for them. “It doesn’t seem to matter that this is unlawful” I have been presented with no such law that it would violate. I have seen several laws that support it though. Chocolat Joanne! Perhaps you could share with me which are against easy vacations, such a practice? “112 2nd paragraphs is about whether the claims are vague versus indefinite — not whether or not the claims are broad” We’re not rejecting them for being broad. We’re rejecting them for not clearly and distinctly telling the joanne essay public what you claim.

“Don’t make up a rejection just because you “think” there is better art out there, but you just haven’t found it yet.” You mean a reason for a rejection? Ok, how about next time I tell you a concrete real reason that I didn’t make up. My stomach hurt that day, and it made your application appear to not be entitled to a patent. Good enough for you? “To “think” that there is good art out there without proof and to reject the claims without this proof wastes both the USPTO’s resources and applicants’ resources.”

What’s your point? Mine is traumatic stress disorder essay, that your application does not appear to be entitled to a patent. My point is supported by statute, but whatever it is that is your point seems to chocolat joanne harris essay go unmentioned in the statute. “Do you have statistics on vacations the quality of the harris applications being rejected?” Funny you should ask! I have them right here! 100% appeared to not be entitled to to thesis report writing a patent on examination! “Do you have evidence of management lowering the allowance rates, or is this conclusion the result of empirical evidence?”

Try anecdotal. Although there is harris essay, evidence of lowered allowance rates, the pto presented it. “Unfortunately, us patent attorneys (and clients) acquiesce to this bu11sh it far too often” Speaks volumes about to thesis report you doesn’t it? As to your comment about chocolat harris my not knowing the quality of the work being produced, au contraire, I’ve been checking out some other people’s work, and the design argument, it does leave much to be desired.

I personally have a few vices myself, I use range caselaw against chocolat harris essay, claims that say “greater than” or “less than” occasionally when they don’t appear to character essay handout be entitled to a patent. I base this vice on the theory that by stating “greater than x” all you are really doing is putting the range of values that is greater than x into words. Would that not be the case? Well, it is the case, but applicants take issue with it occasionally. I’ve found that they only take issue with it when I reject all dep claims. Chocolat Joanne! If I indicate one as allowable whooop right up into the ind it goes. I’ve considered just rejecting those types of cases under 103 without the caselaw backup and with just some rational instead. What do you think about that approach? “For well-written applications, examiners can’t seem to find sufficient basis for rejection.”

I find them all the time and nearly all of my apps are “well written”. Just this week I had 2 apps go abandoned! Wootz! Both of them came back with some lame addition to the claims. I simply googled a ref in about 10 secs and rejected it with a rock solid 103. Literally, the device in the new ref specifically was to the design argument essay modify the chocolat essay device in the previous refs in the specific way claimed. Top Creative Programs! Rarely are rejections that clean and quick, but they do happen. I considered Off notice on that one, but figured I’d give him a little googlin since it was an RCE. ” The case law on 112, second paragraph has been pretty well settled.” The Cafc said in a recent opinion that this decision was the harris correct one for the pto to implement so the BPAI did.

Chief justice has already told congress to bugger off the patent reform because he’d do it from the judiciary and he’s better at it. Fine with me as long as it gets done. I think it is essay, a great idea. Frankly the patent bar’s professionalism as devolved into down right anarchy. Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay! This results primarily from the desire of clients to drive down the cost of patent preparation. I think that patent claims should be exacting. Traumatic Stress! The namby pamby BS language that is so often espoused serves only to obfuscate what is essay, truly the invention and easy on summer vacations, line the pockets of that unsavory class of attorney-the patent litigator. “If you cannot find the art, then you cannot reject the claim.” But I thought KSR made “everything” obvious? Whine, whine, whine, whine, whine, draft crappy computer-implemented garbage, whine, whine, whine, whine.

“As David Stein aptly put it, this is just another way for examiners to reject claims on harris BS instead of finding good art.” Can I ask a simple question: even if your bullcrap was true, what the frick difference does it make? CAFC, are you listening? Please get rid of Beauregard claims asap so we can all get rid of the design essay these whiners once and for joanne harris all. Argument! They ruined everything and the greedy babies won’t quit complaining. “If you cannot find the art, then you cannot reject the claim. If you cannot reject the claim, then the joanne harris application should be allowed after the application has been examined. Don’t make up a rejection just because you “think” there is better art out essay there, but you just haven’t found it yet.” How do you feel about chocolat harris rejections under Official Notice, and essay, public policy/morality (which doesn’t currently exist)? I agree that if there is no reasonble basis for taking Official Notice, then this line of reasoning should not be used.

Nonetheless, if the Examiner has a reasonable basis that some art exists and such existence amounts to “common knowledge”, how do you feel about harris essay responding to the Official Notice? If you properly overcome the Official Notice, then the case should be allowable over art even if the art teaching the essay about noticed facts surface later on during prosecution. To me, this seems like a quick way to overcome even the Examiner’s ideal art, if such an art existed. If I can overcome the Examiner’s noticed facts (which amounts to the Examiner’s theoretical best art), would that result in more compact of a prosecution, i.e. if I could poke holes in the noticed facts, would that help move towards allowance? “As far as policy goes, the USPTO isn’t a policy making body – what business do they have trying to make policy? The USPTO couldn’t say they will consider, as prior art, references that antedated the filing date of the chocolat joanne harris application by essay on summer up to chocolat a year based upon “policy” reasons.” The USPTO has specific powers to “establish regulations, not inconsistent with law”: In the example you gave of qualifying references that would otherwise not be prior art under 35 USC 102, this rule would clearly be inconsistent with 102 as required by essay “A person shall be entitled to a patent UNLESS”.

Clearly, using references newer than the priority date would violate existing law. I am not clear on the conclusion your draw regarding policymaking and using newer references as prior art. Can you clarify a little more on what you would and chocolat joanne harris, would not consider to be substantive rulemaking? “Pick up any dictionary and you’ll see that most words have more than one meaning. Essay On Summer Vacations! Pick up 5 dictionaries and you’ll likely see 5 different definitions for the same word.” Can you shoot down this type of chocolat joanne erroneous interpretation by post traumatic presenting your own interpretation with support from the specification as originally filed? “If extrinsic reference sources, such as dictionaries, evidence more than one definition for the term, the intrinsic record must be consulted to chocolat harris identify which of the different possible definitions is most consistent with applicant’s use of the terms” “The USPTO wants exactly two things at to thesis report writing, this point: (1) Applicants to file fewer applications, and. (2) Examiners to allow a very small percentage of harris essay filed applications.” Do you have any evidence of this?

From a management objective, if I were a manager for the USPTO, I would want: (a) Applicants to file as many applications as possible, and. (b) Examiners to top creative writing allow as many filed applications as possible (with adequate quality of course). The USPTO has consistently been a profit-centre for the federal government. Harris! To increase profits, it would make sense to increase revenues by increasing filings. Also, issuance and maintenance fees are much higher than other fees not related to an allowance. Similarly, would allowances reduce the traumatic backlog as well, as compared to pending prosecution to infinity? “I don’t know how the USPTO got so off-track as to see itself as the “patent rejection office,” but it is chocolat joanne harris essay, so. So if the USPTO is cultivating an examiner’s toolkit that only allows still more bases for rejection… it’s because that’s all they really care about.” Do you have statistics on the quality of the applications being rejected?

“Examiners simply aren’t permitted to allow many applications, because USPTO management has decided to throttle allowance rates to absurdly low levels.” Do you have evidence of management lowering the allowance rates, or is this conclusion the result of empirical evidence? If yes the latter, see my comment above regarding the quality of applications. “For well-written applications, examiners can’t seem to find sufficient basis for rejection… and to thesis report, so they are taking a third option: delay and churn. It doesn’t seem to matter that this is unlawful and a shocking breach of the mission of the USPTO.” Are you familiar with date goals, wherein managers are withheld pay if their groups do not move old cases? “SPE Award Components. Movement of New Applications (New Date Case Goals)” “These days, I have to advise my clients that they might not see FAOM (or FOAM… the acronym changes daily #128521; ) for chocolat joanne harris ***SIX YEARS*** from filing” Have you considered the accelerated examination program? I would like to critique the various inefficiencies of the government as much as the next person, but I feel that it would be fair to view all the evidence.

Please respond to the raised points. “Just because no art of record anticipates/makes obvious doesn’t mean that the application is not obvious, or even anticipated for that matter.” If you cannot find the picnic art, then you cannot reject the claim. If you cannot reject the claim, then the application should be allowed after the application has been examined. Don’t make up a rejection just because you “think” there is better art out there, but you just haven’t found it yet. **IF** the chocolat patent has value and **IF** the patent will be asserted (which probably knocks out 90%+ of all issued patents), and **IF** good prior art exists, then an infringer/potential infringer will find that art and invalidate the patent. To “think” that there is argument essay, good art out joanne essay there without proof and to reject the claims without this proof wastes both the USPTO’s resources and applicants’ resources. The problem with the USPTO is that there aren’t enough administrative law hawks practicing patent law to top creative be the biggest PITA to the USPTO.

If the FCC, FDA, EPA tried to pull the chocolat joanne essay sh 1t the USPTO does, the introduction administrative lawyers that practice before these agencies would make life a living he11 for those agencies. Unfortunately, us patent attorneys (and clients) acquiesce to joanne harris essay this bu11sh it far too often. Argument! The reason is chocolat, pretty simple, the stakes are typically too low to really put the USPTO’s feet to the fire over any single application. Picnic! Contrary to what some commentors think, the chocolat joanne harris essay value of most patent applications are extremely difficult to determine accurately at essay about, an early stage. As such, most clients are even reluctant to joanne harris file an argument appeal, which is chocolat joanne essay, far easier than putting the USPTO in its place for its slipshod operation and blatant disregard of the law and its own rules. The USPTO has gotten away with substandard office actions for so long that dimwits such as 6K don’t even realize how poor the work product they are actually producing is. xmnr writes “Amenable to multiple plausible constructions’ is a matter of BREADTH not INDEFINITENESS.” xmnr got it perfectly. The way to handle broad claims is with the “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard. If a claim term could be interpreted two different ways, and one skilled in argument essay, the art would recognize the metes and bounds of those two different ways, then it is OK. If an examiner thinks it is chocolat harris, too broad, the examiner interprets the claim both ways and finds art that reads on one of those ways … this will force applicant to narrow the claims. The tool is already in post stress disorder, place to joanne essay go after “overly broad” claims.

112 2nd paragraphs is about whether the claims are vague versus indefinite — not whether or not the claims are broad. Pick up any dictionary and you’ll see that most words have more than one meaning. Easy Vacations! Pick up 5 dictionaries and you’ll likely see 5 different definitions for the same word. The problem with the USPTO new (yet short-lived) tool is that one the examiner comes up with one cockamamie interpretation that doesn’t jive with the normal interpretation, the chocolat joanne harris essay examiner will jump around after like 6k does after he completes his latest quest in WoW exclaiming “I did it!! I did it!!” As David Stein aptly put it, this is just another way for examiners to top creative writing reject claims on BS instead of joanne finding good art. BTW – what gives the USPTO the right to make make/interpret the law?

They aren’t Congress or the judiciary. The case law on 112, second paragraph has been pretty well settled. As far as policy goes, the USPTO isn’t a policy making body – what business do they have trying to make policy? The USPTO couldn’t say they will consider, as prior art, references that antedated the introduction to thesis report writing filing date of the application by up to a year based upon “policy” reasons. If placed in the hands of chocolat harris a reasonable Corp of examiners, I could hold my nose and buy into post traumatic disorder essay, this power grab by the USPTO. However, when the Corp has shown, time and chocolat harris essay, time again, a complete disdain for patent law, their own rules, the APA, common sense, and in certain instances, the laws of physics, then the only thing I would trust the USPTO to do would be to abuse this expanded power to reject claims. “It is a bad idea in the design argument essay, that it gives the essay PTO only more powers in a certain direction.” But it’s the only direction in which they want to move. The USPTO wants exactly two things at this point: (1) Applicants to file fewer applications, and.

(2) Examiners to allow a very small percentage of introduction report writing filed applications. The latter is astonishing in harris essay, itself, and the design argument essay, even more so because the essay USPTO openly and brazenly admits this aspiration. Easy Essay On Summer Vacations! Check out this graph… from the chocolat harris USPTO’s own presentation!! I don’t know how the USPTO got so off-track as to the design argument see itself as the “patent rejection office,” but it is so. So if the chocolat joanne harris essay USPTO is cultivating an examiner’s toolkit that only allows still more bases for rejection… it’s because that’s all they really care about. “I like to think the PTO should be run like a prosecutor’s office. A prosecutor can lay charges against a person, for post stress disorder example, or decide not to. They have a lot of leeway to the point of being unaccountable.” Well, the USPTO would LOVE unaccountability – no BPAI, CAFC, or SCOTUS repeatedly telling it that it’s violating many laws and chocolat joanne essay, the Constitution with its self-legislating, and that its decisions are hopelessly inconsistent. But I think your analogy is apropos.

Prosecutors are neither judge nor jury. Their valid options are to withhold prosecution (i.e., to allow a patent application without challenge) or present the best case for to thesis conviction (or rejection.) Yet, examiners break from chocolat essay, this model in two ways – (1) Examiners simply aren’t permitted to allow many applications, because USPTO management has decided to throttle allowance rates to absurdly low levels. (2) For well-written applications, examiners can’t seem to top creative writing find sufficient basis for rejection… and so they are taking a third option: delay and churn. It doesn’t seem to matter that this is unlawful and a shocking breach of the mission of the USPTO. These days, I have to advise my clients that they might not see FAOM (or FOAM… the acronym changes daily #128521; ) for ***SIX YEARS*** from filing. Can you imagine if the chocolat joanne U.S. Argument Essay! criminal justice system were run that way? (Well, notwithstanding that sordid little affair in Cuba?) My problem is harris essay, that section 101 seems to programs fail section 112. Based on the various court rulings, the section appears insolubly ambiguous.

I agree with David Stein’s postings. “Other sections – 101, 112, etc. – are SUPPOSED to joanne essay be fairly low thresholds of top creative formality and competence. ” I agree, how do you keep failing to meet even the harris essay lowest of the low thresholds put before you? “The bottom line is simple: the USPTO hates searching.” Could be true, but if it was then they could simply narrow all searches to be one subclass search and that’s it. “So the USPTO’s answer to reducing backlog (other than the obvious answer: ALLOW those valid applications!” Problem is they’re not really valid. Just because no art of record anticipates/makes obvious doesn’t mean that the application is not obvious, or even anticipated for that matter.

What’s more, the problem is also that they failed to stress disorder essay meet the chocolat harris essay lowest bar of easy essay patentability, 101. “I like to think the PTO should be run like a prosecutor’s office. A prosecutor can lay charges against a person, for example, or decide not to. They have a lot of leeway to the point of being unaccountable.” This man is truly a visionary. My hat is off to essay you sir. When I got here I was genuinely surprised that the the design argument essay PTO was not more like this than it is. I think it if was then all involved would feel more comfy about allowing things. Imo, you lawyers should lobby for this type of PO.

At the outset, it should be noted that this question assumes that the “insolubly ambiguous” standard is chocolat joanne essay, currently in top creative writing programs, play at the PTO. I would respectfully assert that this is not the cae, and that patent office policy, currently, is to reject a claim under 112(2) when the metes and joanne harris essay, bounds of character analysis that claim are not clear. In other words, the chocolat joanne harris PTO standard is already quite a bit lower than insolubly ambiguous. Is this a good thing? Yes, it is. Patents are legal monopoly on the subject matter that is hte subject of the claim.

A legal monopoly is a powerful right and the public needs to be put on notice of the scope of that monopoly so that it can be confidently avoid infringement. To confidently avoid patent infringement, one must be able to reasonably predict what activities will fall within the easy scope of the claim and what activities will fall outside the chocolat joanne harris essay scope of the claim. Thus, a higher standard for 112(2) at the PTO is a good thing, in that indefinite claims are less likely to issue and the public will be able to navigate around the scope with reasonable confidence. The question is how high should the standard be? The metes and bounds of the claim must be clear but breadth is picnic, not indefiteness. The nature of language makes claims amenable to more than one reasonable construction and so clearly that shoudl not be the standard. I believe this is an area where the term “metes and joanne harris, bounds” is actually quite sufficient and that examiners can apply that term without great difficulty. There is always an vacations element of subjectivity in rejections; some examiners may be more stringent in applying 112(2) standards than others. At the very least, however, the examiner should require that the chocolat harris metes and bounds of the claims be clear enough so that the examiner can figure out what she is supposed to on summer vacations be searching for. If the examiner can’t figure out how the claims works, and therefore cannot do a proper prior art search for that claim, then the claim should be rejected under 112(2). It is both a good idea and a bad idea.

It is a good idea in the sense that it gives the PTO more powers. It is a bad idea in that it gives the PTO only chocolat harris essay, more powers in a certain direction. I like to think the PTO should be run like a prosecutor’s office. A prosecutor can lay charges against a person, for example, or decide not to. They have a lot of leeway to the point of being unaccountable. The PTO should be the same: there is essay about, close to no sense in defining in general what makes an invention novel or useful. Experts at chocolat joanne harris essay, the PTO should be able to decide. To Thesis Report! For the inventor there is a price for weak PTO patents — if a patent can be challenged later it is not that valuable.

Obviously I hardly know anything about the details of the harris essay laws involved. stein “But the USPTO is breaking free of these moorings. Increasingly, examination is focusing on nitpicky rules of formality, academic arguments of interpretation, and character handout, wholly arbitrary procedural rules.” But applicants never engage in that behavior. Chocolat Joanne Harris! And if they did it was only because the PTO engaged in it first! If I may quote a regular commenter here (due to arrive any moment): “eeeyeahright” I think I can now set forth my core problem with this (and KSR, and Bilski.) The heart of patent examination is in sections 102 and 103.

Other sections – 101, 112, etc. Character Analysis Essay Handout! – are SUPPOSED to be fairly low thresholds of formality and competence. As long as the specification is written with a minimum standard of workmanship, and joanne, as long as the invention passes some minimal burdens of utility… then the formalities have been met, and examination should begin. But the USPTO is breaking free of these moorings. Increasingly, examination is focusing on nitpicky rules of formality, academic arguments of interpretation, and introduction, wholly arbitrary procedural rules. The bottom line is simple: the USPTO hates searching. Examiners can’t do a sufficient job in the allotted time frame, and management refuses to reconsider productivity requirements. It’s hard and time-consuming to dig up, understand, and apply references.

It’s much easier to fall back on “smell tests.” So the USPTO’s answer to chocolat joanne reducing backlog (other than the obvious answer: ALLOW those valid applications!) is more smell tests, more tools for “easy” rejections, and argument essay, more arbitrary procedural cutoffs. Of course, the hardship falls squarely on joanne essay the shoulders of top creative writing programs applicants. But in the USPTO’s warped view of reality, this is poetic justice – because we’re the cause of the problem with our increased filings. “‘Amenable to chocolat essay multiple plausible constructions’ is a matter of BREADTH not INDEFINITENESS.” “Of course the threshold should be reduced. Clearly, examiners need more weapons for rejecting claims in essay picnic, lieu of doing an joanne essay actual search or finding prior art.” I concur. They should have put in picnic, the opinion that if the claims are suitably amendable then no analysis of the claims under 102/103 is possible since there is at least 2 different interpretations which are completely independent and harris, distinct from one another. But since this isn’t a restriction, and is instead a rejection, this counts as a FOAM! WOOOOOOOTZ!

The courts/bpai: taking the “hard” out of post stress disorder essay being an examiner one step at chocolat harris, a time. Holy sht, 15 points for a sentence: Because it will allow the pto to post traumatic “encourage” applicants to joanne harris essay remedy potential disputes while the claims may be amended. And because examiners will be able to ride the RCE gravy train, in essay, some cases where no claim could be written that doesn’t have more than one meaning, forever, or until the app gives up. Public notice F T W. “No, as it will be used by the PTO as a weapon to reduce the number of joanne applications instead of tool to further prosecution.” But those are one and the same right? “-1 for arguing without explanation that LOWERING a hurdle to patentability will be used as “a weapon to reduce the number of applications.”” “I think it’s funny you call “insolubly ambiguous” a “high standard.” It is essay about, a low standard, as in chocolat harris essay, low quality claims satisfy it.” Ur looking @ it arsebackwards from how D is i? “examiners don’t use the “insolubly ambiguous” standard and have probably never heard of it.” Some of us used to, in argument essay, fact my SPE would make me. And all my previous SPE’s would make me. They usually wouldn’t bring up “insolubly ambiguous” instead, the threshold is “whether you can really tell what they mean to claim”.

“Second, who are the policymakers and how could they possibly lower the standard only during examination?” The BPAI, didn’t you read the previous post on this? ” 2 points out of 15 for anon, 0 for me” lol, more like it. “Yes, because the current standard allows patentees to obtain patents whose scope is not clear until a district court judge decides which of two plainly evident but distinct (and often contradicting) constructions is the “correct” one. Chocolat Joanne! ” Are we talking Ex Parte Miyazaki? ‘Amenable to multiple plausible constructions’ is a matter of analysis essay BREADTH not INDEFINITENESS. Furthermore, any issues of ‘indefiniteness’ are covered by interpreting the claim under the doctrine of broadest reasonable interpretation. That is, if a claim reads under two possible interpretations, that’s not indefinite, it’s BROAD and joanne, can be interpreted in a multitude of ways that expands its scope. I would agree that it is a good idea if the essay about picnic USPTO were reasonable in addressing alleged ambiguities.

My experience, however, is that (for novelty/obviousness) the USPTO unreasonably takes the broadest possible interpretation — as opposed to the broadest reasonable interpretation in harris essay, view of the specification — as if the specification had not been written. Consequently, applicants must unnecessarily address (and sometimes amend in the design, view of) prior art that would never have been implicated under a reasonable interpretation of the harris essay claim terms. I worry that the USPTO will similarly be unreasonable with respect to alleged ambiguities. That said, assuming that the report USPTO does a reasonable job (I doubt they would), the costs of chocolat joanne essay having to write two claims to programs replace an allegedly ambiguous claim is a small price to pay for chocolat the notice benefit to the public. Of course, too many patentees are eager to leverage nebulous/ambiguous claims. This new rule from the Board of writing Appeals is a call to arms for them. Of course the threshold should be reduced. Joanne Essay! Clearly, examiners need more weapons for rejecting claims in lieu of introduction to thesis report doing an actual search or finding prior art.

Adding: the part of the proposal re “going forward” is a closer call. Joanne Essay! I would err on the side of punishing existing patentees as well as current applicants. A better standard would be “reasonably definite” to the skilled artisan. The Design! Also, I would require that any statements or actions (i.e., notice of chocolat joanne infringement letters, requests for licenses) that relate to claim construction be submittable to the PTO by third parties for filing with the essay application so that the chocolat joanne harris public could be aware of introduction to thesis report writing what the patentee believes to be the proper construction of his/her claim, and the public could more readily assess issues of joanne patent abuse and inequitable conduct. Yes, because the current standard allows patentees to obtain patents whose scope is not clear until a district court judge decides which of two plainly evident but distinct (and often contradicting) constructions is the “correct” one. Thus, the current standard fails to force applicants to post disorder essay comply with the requirement of putting the public on chocolat essay notice as to the design essay the reasonable scope of the claimed property right.

I take back my comment, to chocolat joanne harris essay the extent I can. I think all the negatives swirling around confused me… Insolubly ambiguous = high bar to INvalidate a patent, and PTO is top creative writing, considering lowering the chocolat harris bar to invalidating a patent… which is actually raising the bar to patentability. Easy On Summer Vacations! 2 points out of 15 for anon, 0 for joanne harris essay me. As a former examiner and now practitioner, I don’t understand the question, assuming that this is strictly a policy question. The standard is already low for pending applications — examiners don’t use the character analysis handout “insolubly ambiguous” standard and have probably never heard of chocolat harris essay it. It is an invalidation rule, which differs from examination rules, and easy essay, inherently takes into chocolat essay, account the fact that the claims have presumably passed examiner scrutiny. This contributes to essay handout why it is joanne, a high standard in consideration of the presumption of validity. Second, who are the policymakers and how could they possibly lower the standard only during examination? The PTO can’t overrule statute as interpreted by the Fed. Essay On Summer Vacations! Cir., as far as I know, or make substantive patent laws. Perhaps congress can do this, but the language of 112 already seems to be a lower standard than used in the Fed Cir and in chocolat joanne harris essay, practice is already applied as such.

[Response by analysis DDC: Anon, you should remember that law professors not allow practical issues or reality to complicate our exams.] In Europe, Article 84 requires the claims to be “clear, concise and supported”. After issue, the claims as granted is immune to Art 84-based attacks, until the patent owner seeks to chocolat joanne harris amend. Then, the content of the amendment is fair game for the design essay Art 84-based attacks. I think this scheme keeps the show on the road, by encouraging Applicants to go to issue with impact-resistant claims. The USA can scrutinise the last 30 years of chocolat harris essay operation of the top creative programs EPC, take what makes sense and disregard the rest, and I think Dennis, the USPTO and the CAFC sometimes look wistfully at harris, Europe, but can’t bring US opinion round to an open mind on essay on summer borrowing good stuff from joanne harris, Europe. Or is top creative, that just me being child-like, innocent and naive, pds? I think it’s funny you call “insolubly ambiguous” a “high standard.” It is a low standard, as in low quality claims satisfy it. Essay! Particularly for pending applications the standard should be raised significantly to writing improve the clarity of patent rights. While it would be unfair to retroactively apply a new standard to existing patents, we should aspire to improving things in the future. No – it is chocolat harris essay, not.

112 requires that the scope of the claims be ascertainable. Introduction To Thesis Report Writing! A prudential rule allowing the PTO to chocolat joanne harris lower the 112 threshold by adjusting/expanding claim scope results in an uncontrolled inquiry. That is, the PTO analysis of a claim’s scope would involve modifying the claim’s scope itself. I can make anyone fail a breathalyzer if I can add alcohol to programs their blood during the test. Dennis should give out grades if people answer the chocolat joanne harris essay question. I suggest 0 points for anon.

1 for character analysis handout grasping that the PTO has real-world incentives that have little to do with substantive patent law; -1 for arguing without explanation that LOWERING a hurdle to joanne essay patentability will be used as “a weapon to reduce the number of applications.” Calling the PTO policymakers is being polite at easy essay on summer, best. A good idea? No, as it will be used by the PTO as a weapon to reduce the number of applications instead of tool to further prosecution. Comments are closed. Dennis Crouch Associate Professor, University of Missouri School of Law SSRN Articles Jason Rantanen Professor, University of Iowa College of Law SSRN Articles Occasional guest posts by IP practitioners and academics. About 25,000 individuals now receive Patently-O via e-mail each morning.

We regularly post top patent jobs from leading firms, corporations, and government and educational institutions. Find a patent professional among the 15,000+ monthly visitors of the job board, many of whom are patent professionals at essay, large firms and corporations.

Pay for Essay and Get the Best Paper You Need -
Review: Chocolat | The Literary Omnivore

Manchester Metropolitan University. You can access information regarding coursework and coursework submission deadlines via Moodle (in the Assessments area). Within this area you should find the following information relating to chocolat joanne harris coursework: The units you are registered for Coursework for each unit The type of coursework ie. Character Analysis Handout? essay, portfolio, presentation, in class test etc. Submission deadline(s) for chocolat joanne harris essay each piece of coursework Number of easy vacations copies to be submitted Whether it has to be run through Turnitin Whether it is a group submission.

From the chocolat joanne, Moodle Assessment area you can: Download and print the relevant coursework cover sheets for your assignments. Go to Coursework Information Site and access ‘My Assignments’ A list of the units for which you are registered. The units where the element of essay about assessment is coursework.

The submission deadlines for all coursework related to a particular unit. The location where the coursework is to chocolat essay be submitted. Any revised submission deadlines where these have been approved by about picnic, a Faculty Exceptional Factors Panel or via a Personal Learning Plans (PLP). Coursework you have already submitted and the dates submitted. Coursework that has not been submitted or has been submitted late and joanne, the date submitted. What do I need to to thesis do to submit my coursework? Select the harris, relevant piece of coursework - each piece of coursework will have its own cover sheet. Click ‘Download Cover Sheet’ and print. Attach the cover sheet securely to argument essay your coursework.

Does it matter if I print the harris, wrong coursework cover sheet? Yes it does. Each coursework cover sheet is specific to you and specific to the individual piece of coursework you are submitting. DO NOT submit a coursework cover sheet for another piece of your coursework. DO NOT use another student's coursework cover sheet. Essay About? Using the wrong coursework cover sheet could result in a late or non-submission record for chocolat harris essay that piece of coursework. Contact the post stress essay, Student Hub with the following details if you believe you have submitted the wrong coursework cover sheet. Your name Your MMU ID Unit title, Unit code, piece of assignment title and submission deadline on the incorrect submitted Cover sheet Unit title, Unit code, piece of coursework title and submission of the correct cover sheet Your Unit Tutor.

Can I print off my coursework cover sheet in advance? Yes #150; As long as you are registered on essay, the unit, the traumatic disorder, coursework cover sheet will be available to download. If I lose my coursework cover sheet will I be able to print another copy? You can print new copies of the coursework cover sheet up until your coursework has been submitted and chocolat harris, recorded. Once the piece of coursework has been submitted and recorded in the database, the Download Cover Sheet link is easy essay on summer, replaced by the date your coursework was submitted. I need to joanne harris submit more than one copy of the same piece of coursework – what do I do?

You only post stress disorder need to print off one coursework cover sheet. Secure the copies together (or put in a plastic folder) and harris essay, attach the coursework cover sheet. The coursework is writing, a group submission – what do I do? If submitting as part of chocolat harris a group, every member of the group MUST print off their own coursework cover sheet Tick the box on the coursework cover sheet indicating it is a group submission Attach each member of the groups coursework cover sheet to the ONE piece of introduction coursework. I have to submit my work via Moodle – what do I do? How you submit your work in Moodle depends on the type of assessment submission activity that has been set up by your tutor. Normally, they will provide clear instructions in Moodle explaining what you need to joanne harris do.

An over stress disorder essay view of the three main types of assignment submission activity are provided below. The icon shown below indicates a link to a Moodle assignment activity: The icon shown below indicates a link to a Turnitin assignment activity: Moodle Video Assignment Submission. The icon shown below indicates a link to a Moodle Video assignment activity: Do I need a cover sheet for work that I submit online via Moodle? You do not need to joanne harris essay attach cover sheets to assignments that are submitted only online. However, if you are required to essay submit your work online (e.g. to chocolat essay Turnitin for essay about picnic originality checking) and as a printed copy you will need a cover sheet to chocolat joanne harris hand in the printed copy of your work. Do I get a receipt for assignments submitted online? Yes, you will receive a formal email from the Coursework Receipting system when it has been confirmed that you work has been received. For submission to Turnitin assignment activities.

If you are submitting your work to Turnitin, as well as a formal receipt from the MMU coursework receipting system, you will also get an informal receipt from the Turnitin system. Only the email receipt from the MMU Coursework Receipting Systems is essay, considered as formal receipt of your work . You can check the status of any submissions in Turnitin at any time by following the link to the Turnitin activity and selecting the My Submissions tab. For submission to Moodle assignment activities. For submission to Moodle assignments you will receive only a formal email from the chocolat harris, Coursework Receipting system. You can check the status of any submissions in Moodle assignment activities at any time by following the link to the Turnitin Moodle activity and looking under the Submission status heading. Moodle Video Assignment Submission. For submission to Moodle Video assignments you will receive only a formal email from the Coursework Receipting system. You can check the status of any submissions in introduction to thesis Moodle Video assignment activities at any time by chocolat joanne, following the introduction, link to the Moodle Video assignment activity.

Your uploaded videos will be listed as shown below. How do I know the date and time when my assignment is due to be handed in? You will find the chocolat joanne harris essay, date on which your assignment is due in the Assessment block on the right hand side of the character analysis essay, Moodle unit area. Important Note: “You must submit your work on the deadline date. Please do not leave it until the chocolat harris essay, last minute to submit your assignment, in case you encounter any difficulties.

If you are submitting online, you are strongly advised to submit your work by top creative, 9.00 pm to make certain that the joanne essay, system uploads your work successfully before 11.59pm. About? Your work will automatically be recorded as a fail if it is not processed by 11.59pm.” Technical difficulties encountered between 9:00pm and 11:59 will not be considered as exceptional factors should you fail to make the deadline. I have submitted an chocolat joanne assignment to Turnitin. Why was this required and top creative writing, what happens to my work. There are two main reasons that your tutors might be using Turnitin.

This will normally be explained to you by your tutor in the assignment brief. 1. To check the originality of your work. “Students agree that by taking a course at chocolat joanne harris MMU all required assessed work may be subject to submission for stress disorder textual similarity review to chocolat Turnitin.com for programs the detection of plagiarism. All submitted papers will be included as source documents in joanne harris essay the Turnitin.com reference database solely for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of such papers. Use of the Turnitin.com service is subject to the Usage Policy posted on the Turnitin.com site.” 2. Top Creative? To use the Grademark tool provided in Turnitin to award a mark, add comments and feedback to your work. Once this has been done you will be able to view your work along with the mark, comments and joanne harris, feedback that has been provided.

I have to submit my work on a CD/DVD/USB pen drive. How do I do this? You need to print out a coursework cover sheet as usual and character essay, submit via the Coursework Submission Box. For a CD or DVD, place the disc inside a protective case or CD sleeve and put it, along with the Cover sheet inside an A4 plastic pocket wallet (like those you put inside A4 ring binders), and secure the chocolat harris, top with staples. Alternatively use a plastic folder that closes securely. For a USB Pen drive, secure (sellotape) the pen drive to the cover sheet, and post disorder essay, place inside an A4 plastic pocket wallet (like those you put inside A4 ring binders) and secure the top with staples. Written pieces of chocolat joanne essay coursework MUST be submitted via the top creative programs, Coursework Submission Boxes. CD/DVDs/USB Pen drives secured as above should also be submitted via the essay, Submission Boxes. Can I submit my coursework to a Coursework Submission Box located anywhere in the University? No – you can only submit to the Coursework Submission box in the location identified on your coursework cover sheet and in the information contained in ‘My Assignments’ . The location(s) and availability of Coursework Submission Boxes for each Faculty/Campus are listed here and displayed on your ‘My Assignments’ page.

Access to Coursework Submission Boxes is dependent upon the various opening times of University Buildings and availability may vary during University vacations. Character Analysis Essay? University Buildings are closed on public holidays and between Christmas and New Year's day. Non-standard submissions (coursework too large to be submitted via the submission boxes) Alternative arrangements/locations are in place in each Faculty/Campus ie a studio, a lab. Chocolat Essay? etc for character analysis essay the submission of larger or non-standard pieces of harris work, ie journals, garments, portfolios, artwork and dental devises that do not fit into the blue Coursework Submission Boxes. Information in ‘My Assignments’ and your coursework cover sheet will identify the introduction writing, submission location for your coursework. Print your coursework cover sheet and hand this in at the alternative location identified in chocolat essay ‘My Assignments’ page and on the coursework cover sheet. What confirmation do I receive to show that I have submitted my work? The Coursework Submission Boxes are emptied regularly during the day and coursework is logged the day it is the design argument, submitted. The submission deadline for chocolat harris essay all coursework is 9.00pm on writing programs, the submission date. An email receipt is sent to your MMU email account once receipt of your coursework is logged. Please check your MMU email account regularly.

You will receive an chocolat joanne email receipt within 12 working hours of submission (email receipts for work submitted late Friday will be sent the following Monday). What if I cannot submit my work by the submission deadline? If for any reason you feel you will be unable to submit your work by the specified deadline you should immediately make an appointment to see or speak with your Student Support Officer. If you submit the piece of coursework after the submission deadline you will receive a “Late Submission” email, and information in the design argument essay ‘My Assignments’ will automatically update to record the work as a ‘late submission’. Note: a mark of zero will be applied to chocolat harris all late submissions. If you fail to submit coursework you will receive a Non Submission email notification, and information in ‘My Assignments’ will show ‘non-submission’ against that piece of coursework. Please note that if you do not undertake coursework based assignments and essay picnic, you are a student on harris, a Programme participating in the Student Engagement Monitoring Scheme, this will trigger further correspondence regarding non-engagement in your programme of study.

Unless a PLP extension is in place or Exceptional Factors have been approved by an appropriate panel, a mark of zero will be applied to all late and non submissions. You should be aware of the penalties for late and non submission of coursework. The Design Essay? These are outlined in the Assessment Regulations for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Programmes of joanne essay Study. In Year Assignment Recovery Scheme. In Year Assignment Recovery is open to post traumatic essay Level 4 students who receive a mark of chocolat harris less than 40% for summatively assessed elements of easy on summer assessments (this includes late submission) or who fail to submit summatively assessed elements of assessments by specified deadlines. Chocolat Essay? You will have received an email if you are eligible for the design essay this scheme, along with details of who to contact to discuss this further. Please also see Scheme Details. I have exceptional factors which have affected my ability to submit my piece of joanne essay coursework by the submission deadline.

If you feel you that exceptional factors have affected your ability to submit your piece of coursework by the submission deadline you should complete an Exceptional Factors Form (EF1) explaining the circumstances affecting your ability to hand in your work by the submission deadline. For further information on the procedures relating to analysis essay Exceptional Factors, please refer to the Guidance Notes. I have been granted a revised submission deadline by the Exceptional Factors panel how will this be dealt with? The Student Life Office will be informed of any revised submission deadlines. The information in Moodle and in ‘My Assignments’ will automatically show the revised date. I have a Personal Learning Plan (PLP) - what do I do if I can’t hand my coursework in on time? Does your PLP state that you can negotiate revised submission deadlines? If yes – and you are experiencing difficulties meeting deadlines for reasons related to your disability.

Make an appointment with the Departmental Disability Coordinator to discuss your needs and where appropriate agree a revised submission deadline. The Departmental Disability Coordinator will complete a (PLP) Coursework Submission Form identifying the revised submission deadline. You will be given a copy and a copy forwarded to the Student Life Office. The revised submission date will show in ‘My Assignments’ via Moodle and the Coursework Information Site. You have been absent from the university and were unable to request a revised submission deadline or have missed your deadline for reasons related your disability (e.g. hospital admission), please speak to the Departmental Disability Coordinator. If yes – BUT the reasons you are experiencing difficulties meeting deadlines are NOT related to your disability i.e an illness not related to chocolat joanne harris your disability or a family bereavement. Your request for an revised submission deadline will have to be considered by the Exceptional Factors Panel.

Complete an Exceptional Factors Form (EF1) and submit your form in argument essay accordance with the joanne harris essay, Exceptional Factors process. Full details of which are found at picnic http://www.mmu.ac.uk/academic/casqe/regulations/exfacs-students.php. If your PLP does not state you can negotiate revised coursework submission deadlines. And you are experiencing difficulty meeting deadlines for chocolat harris essay reasons related to a disability (e.g. condition has deteriorated), you should contact the essay about, Disability Development Service. And exceptional factors prevent you from attending, completing or submitting an chocolat assessment on time then you will have to on summer vacations go through the chocolat joanne harris essay, normal exceptional factors procedures as detailed above. Problems with submitting your work? Some or all of my units are not showing in ‘My Assignments’ You may not be registered on all your units. Visit the Student Hub to ensure you are registered on the correct units. The Design Argument Essay? If you are not registered on joanne harris essay, a particular unit you will not be able to print the coursework cover sheet to vacations submit your assignment. I can’t print my coursework cover sheet.

If the coursework cover sheet is not showing or it won't download correctly, please contact the Student Hub to resolve the issue. I have not received an email receipt what do I do? First check your spam account/junk mail folder. Check the information in Moodle and ‘My Assignments’ to see if your piece of coursework has been recorded as submitted. If still no email receipt and no record in ‘My Assignments’, then contact the Student Hub/Student Life Office. I have received an incorrect email receipt for my coursework submission – what should I do? If you have received a Late Submission e-mail and you have been granted a revised submission deadline either from the Exceptional Factors Panel or as a result of negotiations relating to your PLP, please email the Student Hub with the following information: The original submission date. The date you submitted your work. Also submit confirmation from the Exceptional Factors Panel or if you have been granted an revised deadline as a result of joanne harris essay your PLP, the PLP Coursework Submission Form signed by the Unit Tutor or designated member of about picnic academic staff.

If you have received a Non-submission email and you believe you have submitted your work please email the Student Hub immediately with the information listed above. Moodle tells me I should expect feedback by joanne, a particular date, what does this mean? As part of essay on summer our MMU Commitment, you can expect feedback on your work by the date shown. Harris Essay? Your Unit Leader will explain the nature and format of the feedback you will receive. Top Creative Writing Programs? If you have been granted an extension for your submission, your return date may differ from the one shown.

What is the status of marks in Moodle? Marks shown in Moodle are provisional and subject to confirmation by Assessment Boards. Chocolat Joanne Harris? It is therefore possible that the final marks you receive are different from disorder essay, your provisional marks.

Academic Proofreading -
“Chocolat” by Joanne Harris ANALYSIS | Anastasia Solodkova

50 successful harvard application essays. Author by : Staff of the Harvard Crimson. Publisher by : St. Martin's Griffin. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 319. File Size : 44,7 Mb.

Description : With talented applicants coming from the top high schools as well as the joanne pressure to succeed from family and friends, it’s no wonder that writing college application essays is one of the vacations most stressful tasks high schoolers face. Add in how hard it is to chocolat harris get started or brag about accomplishments or order stories for maximum effect, and it’s a wonder that any ever get written. To help, this completely new edition of 50 Successful Harvard Application Essays, edited by the staff of the Harvard Crimson, gives readers the most inspiring approaches, both conventional and programs creative, that won over joanne harris essay admissions officers at the design essay Harvard University, the nation’s top ranked college. From chronicling personal achievements to detailing unique talents, the topics covered in these essays open applicants up to new techniques to put their best foot forward. It teaches students how to: - Get started - Stand out joanne essay - Structure the best possible essay - Avoid common pitfalls Each essay in this collection is from a Harvard student who made the cut and is followed by analysis by the staff of The Harvard Crimson where strengths and weakness are detailed to show readers how they can approach their own stories and ultimately write their own high-caliber essay. 50 Successful Harvard Application Essays’ all-new essays and straightforward advice make it the the design essay first stop for chocolat, applicants who are looking to craft essays that get them accepted to the school of their dreams. Analysis. 50 Successful Harvard Application Essays. Author by : Staff of the Harvard Crimson. Publisher by : Macmillan. Chocolat Essay. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi.

Total Download : 629. File Size : 47,9 Mb. Picnic. Description : A compilation of fifty effective and diverse college application essays that offer students insights into what makes an joanne, essay compelling. 50 Successful Ivy League Application Essays. Author by : Gen Tanabe. Publisher by : SuperCollege. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. To Thesis Report. Total Download : 361. File Size : 42,8 Mb.

Description : The powerful tools in this invaluable resource equip students with the skills to write successful entrance essays for top-notch universities. Essay. The strengths and weaknesses of 50 application compositions from Ivy League schools, as well as Caltech, Duke, MIT, Stanford, and essay about picnic University of chocolat essay, Chicago, are analyzed in detail, highlighting techniques to emulate and essay about mistakes to avoid. College admission officers from some of these schools provide informative strategies and inside information on joanne harris their writing assessment criteria. A comprehensive writing workshop provides tips toward selecting topics, developing stories, editing drafts, and applying finishing touches. Acknowledging that the the design written portion of the process is one of the most important factors for admission into highly selective schools, this helpful guidebook offers sage advice and inspiration to keep applicants on the right track. 55 Successful Harvard Law School Application Essays. Author by harris, : Harvard Crimson. Publisher by : Macmillan. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi.

Total Download : 715. Handout. File Size : 42,9 Mb. Description : Presents a compilation of fifty-five essays by successful applicants to Harvard Law School, accompanied by insightful analyses of each essay to reveal why it worked, advice on how to avoid common pitfalls and mistakes, and helpful strategies on how to write an effective essay of one's own. Original. Chocolat Harris. 20,000 first printing. 50 Successful Wharton Business School Essays. Author by : Bredesen Lewis. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi.

Total Download : 256. File Size : 52,8 Mb. Description : This book was created by Wharton Business School students.--Acknowl. 65 Successful Harvard Business School Application Essays Second Edition. Author by : Lauren Sullivan. Traumatic Essay. Publisher by : St. Essay. Martin's Griffin.

Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 585. File Size : 48,7 Mb. Description : YOUR LIFE . . Writing Programs. . Chocolat Harris Essay. IN 300 WORDS OR LESS It's a daunting task. Even the most seasoned professionals find business school application essays to be among the hardest pieces they ever write.

With a diverse pool of talented people applying to the nation's top schools from the most successful companies and prestigious undergraduate programs in the world, a simple biography detailing accomplishments and goals isn't enough. Applicants need clear and easy essay compelling arguments that grab admissions officers and absolutely refuse to let go. To help them write the essays that get them accepted into Harvard or any of the country's other top programs, the staff of The Harbus---HBS's student newspaper---have updated and revised their collection of sixty-five actual application essays as well as their detailed analysis of them so that applicants will be able to: * Avoid common pitfalls * Play to their strengths * Get their message across Wherever they are applying, the advice and tested strategies in 65 Successful Harvard Business School Application Essays give business professionals and joanne harris essay undergraduates the insider's knowledge to market themselves most effectively and the design truly own the process. 100 Successful College Application Essays Second Edition. Author by : The Harvard Independent. Publisher by : Penguin.

Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 885. File Size : 43,8 Mb. Description : The largest collection of successful college application essays available in one volume. Chocolat. These are the essays that helped their authors gain admission to Harvard, Yale, Brown, Columbia, Wellesley, Colby, and other outstanding schools—followed by writing, invaluable comments by experts in chocolat joanne harris, admissions, placement, and college counseling at some of the best learning institutions around the country. This helpful guide includes: 100 complete essays with professional commentary Examples of essays on common topics (family background, athletics, work experience), as well as the more offbeat Essays on the immigrant experience by character, foreign-born students A section of drawing and cartoon essays Insider advice from a Princeton dean of admissions A “What Not to Do” chapter from a top college counselor And more Compiled by members from essay, The Harvard Independent, the weekly newsmagazine of Harvard University, this is an invaluable resource for the design essay, students who want to joanne harris essay write the best possible essay—and improve their chances of traumatic, admission to the best possible school. 65 Successful Harvard Business School Application Essays. Author by : Dan Erck.

Publisher by : Macmillan. Chocolat Joanne Essay. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 139. File Size : 52,5 Mb. Description : The staff of the character analysis Harbus, the Harvard Business School's newspaper, presents essays that got their writers into the #1 business shool in the nation, with tips to help readers do that same at Harvard--or elsewhere. How To Get Into Harvard Law School. Author by : Willie J. Epps. Publisher by : McGraw-Hill. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 137.

File Size : 51,7 Mb. Description : Offers surefire advice as well as 50 successful application essays from chocolat joanne harris, current students and recent graduates. Author by : Staff of the Harvard Crimson. Publisher by : Macmillan. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 354.

File Size : 45,8 Mb. Description : Describes the individual admissions process of fifty students accepted to the prestigious university, sharing strategies for identifying key talents, submitting the perfect application package, and improving networking skills. How To Write A Winning Scholarship Essay. Author by : Gen Tanabe. Publisher by introduction, : SuperCollege. Joanne Harris. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 884. File Size : 41,6 Mb. Description : Provides 30 complete winning scholarship essays with analysis of why they were successful, scholarship interview strategies, QA with scholarship judges, 12 essays that bombed and an essay-writing workshop that covers selecting a topic, creating an outline, writing and editing-- Author by : Janine Robinson. Publisher by : CreateSpace.

Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 241. Programs. File Size : 46,9 Mb. Description : Publisher information from joanne harris essay, iPage.IngramContent.com. The Best Business Schools Admissions Secrets.

Author by : Chioma Isiadinso. Publisher by : Sourcebooks, Inc. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 808. File Size : 41,8 Mb.

Description : Top MBA programs reject more than 80 percent of the applicants. When trying to beat the tough business school competition, how do you know what will get you fast-tracked to post traumatic stress disorder essay the yes pile (or the joanne harris dreaded no pile)? No insider is better suited to set you on the right track than Chioma Isiadinso, a former Harvard Business School MBA Admissions Board Member and writing the founder of harris essay, Expartus, an admissions consulting firm specializing in helping candidates get into the top MBA programs. The Design Essay. The Best Business Schools'Admissions Secretsis the ultimate collection of insider advice, direct from one of the country's toughest admissions boardrooms. Centered around the concept of branding yourself, Isiadinso covers all the essential topics you need to essay master to traumatic disorder essay stay ahead, including: Understanding the admissions criteria Essay essentials Resumes and professional records How to nail the interview Critical mistakes to avoid And much more No other business school admissions advice guide can claim this level of joanne harris essay, authority.

The Best Business Schools'Admissions Secretsis sure to top creative writing programs give you the edge you need to shine in the eyes of admissions boards everywhere. Bs Md Programs The Complete Guide. Author by : Todd A. Johnson. Publisher by : BookBaby. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 109. File Size : 42,9 Mb. Description : Written by a college counselor who has helped hundreds of students like you become the strongest candidate for BS/MD programs. Includes: • How to chocolat joanne essay find the essay best program for essay, your needs • The types of essay questions asked by BS/MD programs • Questions asked during medical school interviews • How to about picnic be the strongest possible candidate This is the most current and complete guide to BS/MD programs available anywhere. For every program it includes: • Contact information • Application deadlines • Program details • Application requirements • Acceptance rates • Whether it admits international students If you want to get into a BS/MD program, read this book. Essays That Worked For College Applications.

Author by : Boykin Curry. Publisher by joanne essay, : Ballantine Books. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 104. File Size : 48,9 Mb. Description : Essays that Worked for College Applications offers advice on writing a successful college admissions essay and presents fifty examples.

Conquering The College Admissions Essay In 10 Steps. Author by : Alan Gelb. Publisher by : Ten Speed Press. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 896. Easy Essay On Summer Vacations. File Size : 47,5 Mb. Description : Writing a memorable personal statement can seem like an chocolat joanne essay, overwhelming project for a young college applicant, but college essay coach Alan Gelb's holistic strategy and reassuring voice takes out the analysis essay handout intimidation factor. Students will identify an chocolat joanne essay, engaging topic and use creative writing techniques to compose a vivid statement that will reflect their individuality. A much-needed supplement to post traumatic essay other college entrance guides, this useful handbook will help students win over the admissions dean, while preparing them to essay write better papers once they've been accepted. A guide to crafting a meaningful and about polished college admissions essay that expresses the applicant's unique personality, strengths, and goals. Step-by-step instructions lead students from idea to initial draft, through revisions, and to a final version ready for submission.

According to the U.S. Department of Education, 69 percent of chocolat harris essay, high school graduates enroll in college.ReviewsPublisher's Weekly, March 24th 2008: Included in test prep/college feature article From the Trade Paperback edition. Write Out Loud Use The Story To College Method Write Great Application Essays And Get Into Your Top Choice College. Author by : Carol Barash. Publisher by : McGraw Hill Professional. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Writing. Total Download : 648.

File Size : 55,5 Mb. Description : Tell your story and connect with the college of your dreams for admission and financial aid If everyone wrote essays like this, admissions officers would have to take every student's essay seriously. --Steve LeMenager, founder of Edvice Princeton and chocolat joanne former director of admission at Princeton University With patience, contagious confidence, and plenty of essay about picnic, real-life examples, Carol illuminates a process that can help anyone discover and articulate those stories that will help them stand out in their own way, and in their own words. Chocolat Joanne Essay. --Shelley Krause, college counselor, Rutgers Preparatory School, and curator of the College Lists Wiki Because the college essay offers applicants their lone opportunity to demonstrate what truly matters to post traumatic disorder them, and to share the chocolat essay qualities that make them unique, the stakes could not be any higher. Essay. With meticulous detail, Barash delivers a foolproof plan for helping college applicants strike essay gold. Chocolat Joanne Essay. --Chad Troutwine, cofounder and CEO of Veritas Prep To write out loud is to write and speak in a way that makes people pay attention. Write Out Loud teaches the Story To College program--with its proven storytelling-based approach, the Moments Method. This program has helped more than 8,000 students from high schools in the United States and around the world create effective, authentic application essays to win admission and financial aid at their top college choices.

Write Out Loud enables anyone to easy essay masterfully integrate past experiences and future ambitions into successful application essays and interviews. The guided exercises help college essay writers get past the stress and confusion of writing about themselves. Write Out Loud reveals how to find unique topics for compelling essays, shows how to make the transition from a spoken story to a written essay, and provides examples of successful essays. The book also walks students through the Common Application, the online college application form used by more than 500 colleges and universities in the US and abroad. Joanne. Inside, students will find: The 12 tools of the character analysis Moments Method Specific guidance for completing the Common Application Charts and checklists to organize essays and supplements Insight from admissions officers on joanne harris essay what characterizes a successful college application essay With Write Out Loud, students build confidence to show their best selves in writing and to gain admission into the college or university they desire. Author by report writing, : Ethan Sawyer. Publisher by : Sourcebooks, Inc. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 303. File Size : 52,8 Mb.

Description : Writing an amazing college admission essay is easier than you think! So you're a high school senior given the chocolat essay task of writing a 650-word personal statement for your college application. Do you tell the story of your life, or a story from your life? Do you choose a single moment? If so, which one? The options seem endless. Programs. Lucky for you, they're not. College counselor Ethan Sawyer (aka The College Essay Guy) will show you that there are only four (really, four!) types of college admission essays. And all you have to do to figure out chocolat harris which type is best for you is answer two simple questions: 1. Have you experienced significant challenges in your life?

2. Do you know what you want to be or do in post traumatic essay, the future? With these questions providing the building blocks for joanne, your essay, Sawyer guides you through the rest of the process, from traumatic, choosing a structure to harris essay revising your essay, and answers the big questions that have probably been keeping you up at introduction to thesis report writing night: How do I brag in a way that doesn't sound like bragging? and How do I make my essay, like, deep? Packed with tips, tricks, exercises, and sample essays from real students who got into their dream schools, College Essay Essentials is the only college essay guide to make this complicated process logical, simple, and (dare we say it?) a little bit fun. Author by harris essay, : Charles Lipson. Publisher by : University of Chicago Press. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 271. Post Essay. File Size : 49,5 Mb. Description : Since its publication in 2004, Doing Honest Work in College has become an integral part of academic integrity and joanne first-year experience programs across the the design country.

This helpful guide explains the principles of academic integrity in a clear, straightforward way and shows students how to apply them in all academic situations—from paper writing and independent research to study groups and lab work. Teachers can use this book to open a discussion with their students about these difficult issues. Students will find a trusted resource for citation help whether they are studying comparative literature or computer science. Every major reference style is joanne represented. Easy Essay On Summer. Most important of all, many universities that adopt this book report a reduction in cheating and plagiarism on joanne harris essay campus. Essay. For this second edition, Charles Lipson has updated hundreds of examples and included many new media sources. There is now a full chapter on harris essay how to take good notes and use them properly in papers and assignments.

The extensive list of citation styles incorporates guidelines from the American Anthropological Association. The result is the definitive resource on academic integrity that students can use every day. “Georgetown’s entering class will discover that we actually have given them what we expect will be a very useful book, Doing Honest Work in easy, College. It will be one of the first things students see on chocolat joanne harris essay their residence hall desks when they move in, and we hope they will realize how important the topic is.”—James J. O’Donnell, Provost, Georgetown University “A useful book to writing keep on chocolat joanne essay your reference shelf.”—Bonita L. Wilcox, English Leadership Quarterly. Top Creative Programs. Author by : Donald Asher. Chocolat. Publisher by : Random House LLC. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi.

Total Download : 373. File Size : 54,8 Mb. Description : Veteran higher-education consultant Donald Asher demystifies the graduate school application process and offers a detailed action plan that has proved successful for some of the most competitive programs in the country. The 50 sample essays-selected from thousands of candidates-showcase the best of the best, while the Essay Hall of introduction to thesis report, Shame identifies common pitfalls to joanne harris avoid. Character Analysis Essay. Sample letters of recommendation and essays for scholarships, residencies, fellowships, and postgraduate and postdoctoral applications cover all stages of the application process.

Teaches how to craft a winning essay with 50 state-of-the-art samples to inspire, instruct, and all but guarantee a top-of-the-pile application. Updated third edition includes an entirely new chapter dedicated to online applications and joanne how they're managed, processed, and considered. Previous editions have sold 100,000 copies. Author by : Michele A. Post Stress Disorder. Hernandez. Publisher by : Grand Central Publishing. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 629. File Size : 46,7 Mb. Description : A former admissions officer at Dartmouth College reveals how the world's most highly selective schools really make their decisions. Author by joanne essay, : Valerie Pierce.

Publisher by : Front Porch Press (MI) Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Essay On Summer Vacations. Total Download : 358. File Size : 50,9 Mb. Joanne Harris Essay. Description : Provides guidelines and advice for character analysis essay, high school students and their parents on preparing for college, including standardized tests, extracurricular activities, choice of college, and financial aid assistance. Chocolat Harris Essay. Author by : Gen S. Tanabe.

Publisher by : Supercollege Llc. Report. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 168. File Size : 47,9 Mb. Joanne Harris. Description : Discusses application essays, standardized tests, financial aid and the design scholarships, the chocolat harris college interview, and the secrets of a great college application. Author by : Staff of the Harvard Crimson.

Publisher by traumatic essay, : St. Joanne Essay. Martin's Griffin. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. Total Download : 900. File Size : 47,5 Mb. Description : Proven Admissions Strategies from Successful Students In How They Got into Harvard, fifty successful applicants to Harvard University share their tips and tactics for succeeding in the college admissions process. Easy On Summer. The students profiled in this book were not all class valedictorians, star athletes, or Harvard legacies. In fact, many were simply strong all-around applicants who beat the chocolat joanne essay odds and got into one of the country's most selective institutions. Through each concise account of a single student's resume and admissions story, you'll learn lessons and strategies that you can use on picnic your own applications. In all, eight key admissions strategies are addressed, including: -How to identify and present a key talent -How to make your well-roundedness an asset, not a weakness -How to forge connections and use them to your advantage Each student profile also includes all their vital information, including: -Test scores and chocolat joanne GPA -Extracurricular activities and introduction to thesis writing awards -Family background and chocolat harris essay hometown. Top Creative Programs. Author by : Joie Jager-Hyman.

Publisher by chocolat joanne harris essay, : Harper Perennial. Format Available : PDF, ePub, Mobi. The Design Argument Essay. Total Download : 651. Joanne Harris Essay. File Size : 46,8 Mb. Description : A former Ivy League admissions officer, Joie Jager-Hyman follows five bright and eager high schoolers—students from diverse ethnic, social, and financial backgrounds—as they each put their best foot forward on the road they hope will lead them to the hallowed halls of Harvard University.

At once a remarkable true story of dedication, achievement, and heartbreak and a guide for character essay, success in an ultra-competitive environment, this important work deserves a place in the home of every family that has ever dreamed of receiving that coveted “fat envelope” in the mail. Jager-Hyman also offers a startlingly frank appraisal of the chocolat college admission process and the important roles race and class continue to play in a student's efforts to writing attend the best school possible.

Buy Essays Online from Successful Essay -
Chocolat Critical Essays - eNotes com

essay on papacy by Melissa Morris. (1) The topic of papal influence in the conversion of infidels is chocolat essay, a necessary and important issue to consider when evaluating the role of Europeans in the colonization of the Americas. The idea to research and examine the Catholic popes of the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries originated in a class at Lehigh University. This class, The Literature of Justification , aimed to look at how Europeans justified the use of violent means in the conversion of infidels in the New World. In order to top creative programs better understand how these nations, such as Spain, Portugal, England, and harris others rationalized violent tactics and easy essay vacations the denial of infidel rights, it is harris, mandatory that the role of the Roman Catholic Church is introduced. (2) The discovery of the report writing New World did not arise simply with the landing of Christopher Columbus; it began when European nations realized that a great deal of wealth and prospective Catholic believers could be discovered. The Catholic Church possessed a great deal of influence in the centuries leading to the exploration of the New World, and in the fifteenth century European nations looked to the pope to determine the right of colonization and conversion of foreign lands. Thus, before looking at nations such as Spain, England, or France, one must look at the role the Church played in joanne granting or refusing acknowledgement of colonization to European nations. (3) Alexander VI, author of the papal bulls Inter caetera divinai , Inter caetera , and Inter caetera (II) , represents an example of the power and influence the pope possessed in the fifteenth century as exploration of the New Word was truly exploding. To Thesis Report? The following research reflects the history of and building of the papal influence that Alexander VI possessed; the actual wording and effect of chocolat joanne harris essay Alexander's third bull on Spanish colonization, Inter caetera (II) ; how his bulls become the analysis essay handout justification Spain wanted and needed to make a presence in the New World; and the precedence Alexander VI created in the partitioning of foreign lands by popes. Importance of Papal Influence in the Conversion of Infidels.

(4) In order to understand how and why European nations felt that violent conversion tactics against infidels was acceptable, one must look toward the Catholic Church. It is imperative to understand the expectations placed upon religious and secular leaders and the conflicts that arose between nations. The Church did not gain instantaneous say in the colonization tactics of European nations but, rather, had to conduct propaganda campaigns and influence kings one at a time to build trust and harris a say in political matters. The Church desired a voice in foreign expeditions because it recognized that the resources of the writing programs new worlds could ultimately be profitable for chocolat Catholics worldwide. (6) When studying the discovery of the New Worlds by argument Europeans in the twelfth through fifteenth centuries, few might consider the impact of the Roman Catholic Church. Essay? After the blessing of St.

Peter as the first pope in 33 A.D., the Roman Catholic Church propagated and invested in a conquest of conversion to help educate all individuals in the ways of the Lord. The means of converting, colonizing, and conquering nonbelievers were manipulated depending upon the time period and influence of the pope over Christian kings. Papal influence is the design argument, important because in their attempt to chocolat joanne essay reign in all matters, religious and secular, popes and the Catholic Church created the standards and expectations by which European explorers were to treat New World infidels. Top Creative Writing? While trying to expand, unify, and solidify the boundaries of the joanne Catholic Church, papal leaders, kings, and explorers lost sight of the need to gently convert nonbelievers. With the promises of treasures, spices, and trade before their eyes, these Christians came to regard New World Indians as deserving of violence, as an invisible entity, and as expendable in regard to the larger cause.

Increasing the population, magnifying spirituality, and securing monetary wealth were necessary measures for the survival of the Church as the savior of top creative programs mortals. Alexander VI's bull Inter caetera is an example not only of the role the Catholic Church took in chocolat the fight for riches and land but also of the to thesis report writing pope's power to disregard human beings as deserving of chocolat harris essay kindness, respect, and the right to freedom in a quest for necessary Church gain. Inter caetera : Opening up a Whole New World for Europeans. (7) One of the most influential popes, Alexander VI, created a set of three papal bulls in May of 1493, Inter caetera divinai , Inter caetera , and Inter caetera (II) . Inter caetera II , the post stress main text discussed here, fully demonstrates the power of the papal throne and the influence it had amassed over European nations in the late fifteenth century. Chocolat Joanne? Written as the final say on Spanish colonization of the essay on summer Americas, Alexander created Inter caetera II with favoritism directed toward the Spanish crown, to help the Church expand its boundaries. To better understand the positioning of the chocolat harris Church within secular and religious discourses and the role of Inter caetera II (hereafter referred to as Inter caetera throughout this text), the background of the papal throne must first be discussed. (8) The Holy See was not initially respected as a representative voice for introduction to thesis both secular and religious matters. Originally, the pope was viewed as a human representative of Christ's divinity and presence on earth, with influence only over Christian Church issues. The amount of joanne harris essay religious importance in early politics cannot be questioned, but until Christianity officially became the religion of Rome in 315 A.D., the writing influence the pope publicly possessed over Christian individuals was not substantial enough to influence the conquest of land. It was not until religious leaders and joanne essay popes became situated in the Vatican in 315 that Christians were motivated to look to the Church for guidance before looking to their king in nonreligious matters.

By convincing believers that Christianity was more important, that secular matters necessitated holy action in essay all doing, the Church managed to swing the pendulum of influence from armed kings to pious leaders. Chocolat? Pope Leo IX, in 1054, contributed the post traumatic stress essay most to centralizing the power and influence of the pope in the Christian's eye. Leo IX set the tone and standards for future popes to seek the recognition and support of joanne harris essay Christians by reinforcing the Catholic belief that without the approval of Christ's chosen son, kingdoms were unholy. In acting upon or under unholy laws and rules, a Christian defied God's teachings of goodness. (10) With this faith that popes held the same ultimate profit goals as did kings and kingdoms, Catholics unwittingly allowed the post traumatic disorder essay Church to create a cloak or shield for the brutal conversion of nonbelievers. It was necessary to present nonbelievers as less than human and not worthy of the fair treatment most Europeans expected. The Church and politicians preached that without faith a person was undeserving of equity. New World individuals were viewed as heathens and as sub-human, and the West's religion, civilization, and knowledge [were viewed as] superior to the religions, civilizations, and knowledge of non-Western peoples. This superiority as the redemptive source of the West's presumed mandate to impose its vision of truth on non-Western peoples was neither hidden nor denied (Williams 6).

Such a disavowal of the Native's right to freedom and essay personal belief helped to convince kings and commoners that heathen lands and the New World had to be tamed in order to obtain the riches and followers of God. (11) It is easy on summer, this standard that helped Urban II, in 1088, to recruit Catholics to push the boundaries of the Christian world further than had ever been attempted in chocolat history: Europeans, as Christians, had a duty to spread the word of the gospel and a right to engage in trade and to cultivate unoccupied land without interference. Conversely, the peoples of the New World had an obligation to receive the ambassadors of the pope, the trade expeditions and the colonists, and any resistance or hostility to the European presence could be met with force of arms. (Dickason ix) The need for more prestige, power, and land became an essay on summer addictive and recurring process for the Catholic Church, and as more land was acquired and foreign conquests met with success, more eyes turned favorably toward the Holy See. Initiated with Urban's reign in 1095 and continuing throughout history, treasures and land were motivators for the conversion of nonbelievers. The spreading of Catholicism was used as propaganda for joanne harris essay recruiting crusaders and colonizers; religious motivation had never been the sole hallmark of medieval expansion […] The crusades, like the American frontier in the nineteenth century, were to be a safety valve, drawing off those who were too aggressive for peaceful life at home (Muldoon 5). Ultimately, the Crusades and the expansion of the Catholic empire were not truly movements to save heathen nonbelievers from the design eternal damnation but, rather, campaigns for profitable gains. (12) After the successes of the first Holy Crusade in 1095 were tallied and assessed, Christian kings and Catholics themselves had come to believe that a man who could bring such success and profit to Christianity could do no wrong. With the faith of joanne harris essay kings and commoners thus sealed, The pope held unquestioned universal jurisdictional authority on earth over all the Church's subjects, real and potential. Resistance to that authority constituted resistance to God's law.

The papacy possessed the power not only to punish the deluded pagans but also to programs assume the rule over their territories, which rightly belonged to Rome in the first place (Williams 41). Chocolat Harris Essay? Urban's ability, and that of the popes following him, to convince knights and kings to go to war, commoners to contribute funds to the Crusades, and essay expand the population and land wealth of the Catholic states granted the joanne essay pope more power than ever historically allotted to the Holy See. That power fluctuated a bit throughout history, but the pope did not again experience significant loss of influence until the English Reformation in the design essay the early 16th century. (13) It is this desire to continue possessing absolute power that allows the Church to condone the violence and brutal tactics used by colonists and conquerors on New World infidels. With the argument that the only way to achieve the ultimate end of world-wide Catholicism is to use any means necessary, Pope Gregory IX, in 1227, is able to use tradition to his advantage. Europeans had come to believe that any individual with faith in God was stronger, more deserving of success, and possessed the right to show nonbelievers the right manner in which to live. In order to convince nonbelievers of this right, Catholic Europeans began to express the belief that any means necessary must be implemented when converting nonbelievers. In an explanation that mimics that of survival of the fittest, he explains the application of aggression and hostility toward others in the conquest of land as acceptable: Who does not know that kings and princes derive their origin from men ignorant of God who raised themselves above their fellow men by pride, plunder, treachery, murder—in short, by every kind of crime—at the instigation of the chocolat harris Devil, the prince of the design argument essay this world, men blind with greed and intolerable in their audacity (Williams 25). Pope Gregory effectively places the joanne role of the Church and colonizer as that of a warrior against evil, or, more importantly, nonbelievers. It is this mindset that resonates throughout history. With the refusal to change the traditions of conversion, the Catholic Church continued to abuse infidels and disregard the actual beginning words of Christ.

Treating others as one would have done unto themselves was thrown to the wind in an effort to obtain riches and treasures in introduction to thesis report the New World. Religious Texts and joanne essay Inter caetera. (14) With an understanding of how popes such as Alexander VI came to possess influence over kings, it is necessary to examine how that influence was conveyed through words. The bull Inter caetera is on summer, important because the chocolat essay nations of Spain and Portugal honored it. The new lines of property drawn were observed because they were lines created by the Church. Just as the power and disorder influence of the pope himself fluctuated throughout history, so did the power of written papal law. As popes fought to joanne harris gain a foothold in the realm of politics, the written word became an effective means of analysis essay communicating and persuading Christian kings worldwide to joanne defer decisions to religion.

Innocent I even went so far as to claim that any actions occurring in Christian states must be communicated to him: […] all 'greater causes' [ causae maiores ] – a vague and almost infinitely expansible expression – should be reserved to the apostolic see. 'Whatever is done in the provinces', he laid down, 'should not be taken as concluded until it has come to the knowledge of this see' (Barraclough 24). Letters with directions such as these were not taken lightly; religion and religious beliefs, at post traumatic stress essay that time, influenced a believer's every move. If a man of God claimed that no action would be deemed holy without consent of the Church, fear of damnation and the eternal unknown forced believers to seek religious authority. (15) Pope Gregory VII, in 1076, used such power to his advantage and was influential in the realm of public speech and propaganda. Chocolat Joanne Essay? It was under Gregory's term that papal decree truly motivated or influenced Christian kings to take action in favor of or against the Church. As the analysis essay handout first pope who deliberately set out to cultivate new fields, outside and beyond the joanne control of the Roman Empire, and the design argument essay thus to lessen the dependence of the papacy on the imperial government, Gregory VII needed to ensure that his plans and wishes were able to reach a large audience (Barraclough 31). He was able to do so by having all religious leaders circulate his written plans and suggestions for harris essay increasing the size and population of the Catholic Church by converting infidels. Documents that could not be read were shared verbally, increasing Gregory VII's audience ten-fold. (16) In 1088 under Pope Urban II, following Gregory VII's example, written copies of his decrees and easy essay on summer vacations plans for Holy Crusades into chocolat essay infidel lands became available for kings and religious leaders. Such widespread publication of and promotion of a holy war helped to ensure that religious leaders across Europe were able to spread the word and influence both the nobility and the common man. These written proclamations, also verbally communicated in traumatic disorder essay 1095 in his speech at Clermont, secured persuasion orally, textually, and politically.

Religious texts, in the forms of letters, stories, and papal bulls, not only informed individuals of the positions of the Church but also advertised and chocolat joanne stated laws to essay about be obeyed in a holy light. Chocolat Essay? Therefore, by the beginning of the eleventh century […] the papacy had laid up a considerable store of moral capital. The new nations [both Europeans and character analysis converts] looked to Rome for spiritual leadership (Barraclough 51). Popes and chocolat religious leaders, throughout the tenth and eleventh centuries, had set out and successfully exercised one of the most influential propaganda schemes in argument history. Not only had they convinced secular leaders that the pope was the source of all knowledge and approval, they had convinced believers to go to war to win land, riches, and new believers for the Church: It set the pope, in place of the emperor, at the head of Europe, and assured the papacy a moral leadership (Barraclough 91). The popes had completely and harris essay effectively made themselves princes of secular and religious status. (17) It is with this role of princely duty that the popes, especially after Urban II's reign, were able to further increase the profits of the picnic Church and continue to chocolat joanne harris essay publish proclamations of a nation's right to colonize and conquer infidel lands. The Papacy, too, had its special interests in the situation of the Holy Land and its Western communities. […] The popes were eager also to keep the Crusading armies under their own special control because power over future Christians ensured a successful growth in the population of Catholics (Brundage 190). Character? Historical religious texts, especially bulls, are an important aspect in the growth of the size of the Christian states. Written documents, such as Pope Eugene IV's Romanus pontifex and Alexander VI's Inter caetera , specifically marked where European Christians could and could not colonize. In essence, the crusades have sometimes been styled the foreign policy of the papacy (Erdman xvi).

Specifications limited the ability of kings to conquer lands as they pleased and, in turn, made winning the approval of the pope's favor a profitable endeavor. (18) Thus, to win the support of the pope in word and essay deed, a nation had to be religiously and politically appealing to the Holy See. In order to accomplish such a feat, kings used the excuse that colonization of new lands was purely for the benefit of nonbelievers. The connection between church and the design argument essay state was accompanied by […] the chocolat joanne harris idea that the defense of the church against pagans and robbers was a good deed particularly encouraged by God and the saints (Erdman 26). The Church could not condone any colonization efforts made by Christian kings unless they had cloaked their desire for gold under the guise of Christian conversion. As long as the wars against pagans were truly defensive, religious motives were intermingled with the consciousness of fighting for hearth and home, but Christian kings merely had to suggest that their intentions abroad were of a religious nature in post disorder essay order to obtain papal approval (Erdman 96). Though some kings did have intentions of converting infidels into Catholics, and many might have had the natives' best interests first in mind, far too many leaders allowed the promise of land and gold to come before the harris needs and rights of nonbelievers. (19) Inter caetera and vacations other papal bulls written by joanne essay the popes are important in introduction to thesis writing the realm of colonization. Ultimately, the treatment and unfair abuse of the infidels were considered and discussed in terms of means and ends. Though Innocent III had questioned the propriety of the exercise of power by non-Christians over Christians, but had not denied its legitimacy, the simple fact that he pondered infidel rights in Quod super his , written in 1199, was enough to begin a public discourse concerning what power the papal see should or should not have in joanne harris essay regard to infidel rights (Green 149).

Innocent IV, in the design essay 1243, extended the points discussed to include the right of Christians to joanne take holy lands from traumatic essay native nonbelievers, a right which he carefully supported by stating that only the pope could authorize an attack on a non-Christian prince. Chocolat Harris Essay? While such a premise was supported by the Catholic nations, the issue introduced the problem of injuring relations with potential Christians. Ultimately, Innocent IV, reflecting on Innocent III's discourses, publicly decided that Christians not only had the right but also a duty to reconquer holy lands for Christians, and the obligation to follow religious decrees, even if infidels were hurt in the process. Innocent IV's decrees, based on the opinions of Innocent III, paved the way for Christians to reconquer holy lands for the Church – even if obeying such decrees meant killing the infidel peoples. (20) According to papal bulls created in 1455, 1456, and 1479, Portugal had been granted the right to all the newly discovered lands, but with the to thesis report writing installation of chocolat harris essay Alexander VI in 1492, Spain gained favor in the eyes of the Church, and all previous allocations to traumatic stress Portugal were overlooked. Such a situation represents the ever-changing politics and power struggles occurring between Catholic kingdoms and popes for rule over all matters – religious or secular. In order to harris essay show his dedication to and approval of Spanish exploration of Africa and the New World, Alexander VI, a native of Valencia, created three bulls dated May 3 and post traumatic stress 4, 1493, to redraw the lines of Portuguese authority. As the final say on New World colonization, Inter caetera sets the precedence for all following bulls and legal documents condoning and authorizing Christian kings to colonize heathen lands.

Though it did not completely disregard the Portuguese lands, it did not publicly recognize the king or his conquests of African and South American lands, which hinted at the lack of power the Portuguese king held at the changing of papal authority. (21) Romanus pontifex , the bull written by Pope Eugenius in 1453, had originally granted Portugal the right to colonize and settle the New Worlds. This bull set the structure by which Alexander VI wrote and published his Inter caetera in regard to chocolat joanne the colonization status of Spain. The bulls by Alexander VI and traumatic stress disorder Eugenius are examples of chocolat essay how important and necessary papal approval of colonization had become in the conquest of new lands and riches. The pope had obtained, by the fifteenth century, the ability to come between nations and kings. He had the power and the prestige to post essay determine which nations and lands were worthy of recognition and harris power, a power only allotted to programs those who could offer the Church profits. Joanne Harris Essay? Conflict and essay aggression between Spain and chocolat joanne harris Portugal reared as Alexander VI weighed the pros and the design argument essay cons of which nation should represent more land in joanne essay the New Worlds under the Catholic flag: The outcome was rivalry between the two nations, and disputes about the rights and limits of discovery. Both crowns, Portuguese and Spanish, appealed to the Pope, who accepted the task of arbitrator. His verdict resulted in establishing a line of demarcation, the right of about discovery on one side being allotted to Spain, on the other side to joanne harris essay Portugal (Bandlier 1). The bull Inter caetera effectively arbitrated power to Spain and repealed power previously granted by Eugene IV from Portugal. (22) As a document that approves, endorses, and manipulates New World colonization and the conquest of nonbelievers, Alexander VI's Inter caetera demonstrates the easy essay vacations amount of influence and power the pope exercised over nations competing for land in North and South America.

The bull Inter caetera is harris, a major document because it represents the development of and the continuation of benchmarks for future legal documents written in the realm of legalizing colonization charters. Alexander VI was approached by Spain and Portugal because both disputed what rights the other had in the New World. Because of the analysis essay historical precedence and prestige of the Holy See, both kings viewed the pope as an ultimate umpire and provider of closure. Alexander VI, sensing that having the final say in who should ultimately obtain greater plots of harris land in the New World would benefit the Church, graciously accepted the role of arbitrator in the dispute. He demonstrates the easy vacations power and final word of the papal see because in his bulls on the subject, he repeals and overlooks the decisions made by former popes. Popes Adrian IV, Innocent III, Gregory IX, Innocent IV, and chocolat joanne harris Eugene IV had all written documents and issued papal bulls in regard to the rights and obligations of Christians who attempted to conquer heathen lands.

Alexander VI ignores the words of former popes, merely hints toward the Portuguese presence granted by Eugene IV in Romanus pontifex , and reallocates territory in essay vacations the New World in favor of Spain. (23) Written as a group of three, the Inter caetera divinai , Inter caetera , and Inter caetera (II) became public on May 3 and 4 of 1493. The first two bulls, Inter caetera divinai and Inter caetera , name the Spanish kingdom of Castile as the proprietors of New World land. The third bull, Inter caetera of May 4, specifically demarcates the lines of joanne harris longitude and latitude provided to about picnic Spain, which embodied all undiscovered land. This bull only mentions lands already conquered by chocolat joanne Christian princes and does not name Portugal specifically. Alexander VI's bulls embody all of the papal struggles to obtain influence and power over Christian kings, and their ultimate ability to go back on analysis essay handout, previous proclamations while maintaining power. The third bull, viewed as the final say of the pope, gave the kingdom of Castile the joanne harris essay exclusive rights to territory, trade, and the development of the lands in the New World. Conquest could begin west of the meridian one hundred leagues west of the Azores and introduction report writing Cape Verde Islands. The creation of this bull further intensified the unstable relations occurring between the kingdoms of Castile and Portugal and further spurred the race to chocolat joanne discover new lands, but it also solidified the need to seek the pope's ultimate say in the design colonization matters. Inter caetera : Papal Allowance of Colonization.

(24) The May 4, 1493, Inter caetera is generally discussed and chocolat joanne highlighted because it is the final word of Alexander VI in the dispute between Spain and Portugal over lands west of the Cape Verde Islands. It discusses the lands to be granted to Spain, reassures that the Catholic religion will be spread, gives Spain the right to rule for post stress disorder essay future generations, denies previous papal decrees in favor of harris Portugal, and essay permits Spain to use any means necessary against nonbelievers. Chocolat Essay? Often referred to as Inter caetera II , it closed the introduction to thesis writing door on further discussion concerning Portugal's right to joanne all the picnic lands of the New World supposedly first discovered by chocolat Christopher Columbus. Alexander VI effectively placed the power in Spain's hands as a favor to his homeland and analysis as an chocolat joanne essay investment in future land for the Church: all the lands discovered by or to be discovered in the name of the Spanish Crown in the region belonged legally to Ferdinand and Isabella (Williams 80). Alexander VI took into the design account the chocolat essay manpower, military force, and political prowess of the Spanish crown, especially in relation to the limited powers of the Portuguese kingdoms, and assumed that Spain would have better chances of colonizing and essay on summer gaining Catholic power in New World lands. (25) Thus, his final Spanish bull, Inter caetera II began with a recounting of Spain's victory at Granada and other Spanish actions that had enlarged and expanded the chocolat joanne harris essay Catholic Church to the delight of the essay pope and affirmed the Church's desire to expand its boundaries (Williams 80-81). To ensure that the Church was not approached and chocolat harris essay accused of conquest merely for easy profits, Alexander VI made certain to chocolat joanne harris essay include guidelines for the conversion of heathen peoples.

The usurpation of infidel lands was to to thesis report writing come only in terms of conversion, with land, gold, and treasures as secondary rewards. The pope himself barely disguises the greed of the Church for riches as the conversion of heathens comes within lines of treasures. He leaves the terms conversion and civilized loosely defined, and violent measures are not forbidden. Alexander VI mandated that the Indians be Christianized and civilized by the Spanish Crown, but he does not concretely specify what means are to be used. (26) Alexander VI defines and reassures religious and secular leaders of the chocolat joanne harris power of papal authority. He claims that his bull assuredly ranks highest in regard to all documents issued in the colonization disputes occurring between Spain and Portugal (Davenport 75). He recognizes the need to remind the Christian leaders of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabella, of their duty to always put the Church first in to thesis report political actions.

In doing so, he solidifies the chocolat harris essay position of the Catholic faith in the New World. Alexander VI desires the augmentation of Christian boundaries because such increase in land and believers would increase the easy essay on summer possibilities of gaining treasures. Chocolat Harris Essay? In his warning to the Spanish, Alexander VI makes it clear that the ultimate goal of colonizing new lands is the complete usurpation of power in favor of spreading Catholicism: barbarous nations be overthrown and brought to the faith itself (Davenport 75). He expects that the Spanish will meet conquering nonbelievers with success, and he also expects that the Spanish kingdom will stop at nothing in the name of the report Church. Without expressing or providing any support for the Spanish crown beside the approval of conquest, Alexander VI explains that the Spanish will endure hardships on harris, their own: with every effort, zeal, and diligence, without regard to hardships, expenses, dangers, with the shedding even of your blood. Pain is necessary in the conquest of nonbelievers (Davenport 75). The Church, through Alexander VI's words, is able to maintain pressure on nations while distancing itself from violence and analysis essay wrongdoing. (27) Inter caetera explains, without naming the original Portuguese colonizers, that the Spanish had full reign of the New World. Chocolat Joanne Harris? Alexander's words allow the Spanish to writing make diligent quest for these remote and unknown mainlands and islands through the sea (Davenport 76).

Such a vague and broad suggestion leaves all the lands open while effectively closing conquest for other Christian kingdoms. He acknowledges that there are people who believe in a Creator and who are not heathens in the new lands; infidels who could embrace the Catholic faith and be trained in good morals (Davenport 76). Despite these qualities, he still condones the creation of fortresses and strongholds in preparation for violence. Alexander VI does not try to hide or deny the European belief that all nonbelievers ultimately need violent measures to ensure conversion and to obtain the gold, spices, and very many other precious things of divers kinds and qualities (Davenport 76). Uttering the words of conversion and riches in the same breath signifies the ultimate goals of the Church. (28) Alexander VI embellishes his power to make law and take action while denying the rights of previous papal authority. Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay? By not recognizing the rights of colonization allotted to Portugal by Pope Eugene IV, Alexander IV demonstrates the expectation that Christian kingdoms must remain in present time and programs not look too far to the future while planning for conquest. Alexander VI uses words such as forever and harris all rights to describe the power granted to Spain in discovering more land; he knowingly uses the same words previously allotted to Portugal. When viewed in the present tense, such words are incredible issuances of authority, but when viewed within the context of popes overruling previous decisions, papal authority becomes precarious and can be repealed at any moment.

Therefore, text such as any of the design said islands have been found […] kings of Castile and Leon, forever, together […] all rights, jurisdictions, and appurtenances, all islands, and mainlands found and to be found provide kingdoms with the assumption that New World lands will forever be theirs, but there is always the chance that such allocations can be overturned (Davenport 76). The power of the Church to leave kingdoms in essay fluctuation cannot be underestimated. (29) Such fluctuations occur because the pope does not recognize Portugal by name, which is a denial of the post traumatic disorder essay influence Portugal had been granted in the conquest of foreign lands. In a short, quick line, he acknowledges that Christian kings before Spain have colonized foreign lands, but he limits them to those lands. Portugal and other Catholic kingdoms have no right to cross past the Azores or Cape Verde Islands: none of the islands and mainlands, found and to be found, discovered and to be discovered, beyond that said line toward the west and south, be in the actual possession of any Christian kings (Davenport 76). The important emphasis of his text is the harris word actual possession. Alexander VI is able to make such provisions because he is aware that no Christian princes have yet to effectively conquer lands west or south of the given line.

He does not mention the peoples of these lands, only the land itself. (30) Ultimately, Alexander VI creates a loophole to deny that the essay on summer Church condoned violence because he emphasizes land and not humanity. By leaving directions vague, the Spanish become responsible for the mistreatment of the heathen peoples: only by forcibly denying the Indians their freedom and appropriating their labor could the civilizing task of assimilation be carried out (Williams 83). The Church, by chocolat joanne harris the fifteenth century, had gained enough political power to be able to draw lines and limitations for post traumatic essay colonizing nations. Chocolat Joanne Harris Essay? By providing the programs power to nations for conquests of chocolat essay foreign lands but maintaining a documented distance from the actual actions of the conquerors, the Church was able to effectively maintain an air of moral righteousness over the very same nations they goaded into violence for survival. Alexander instructs the Spanish king and queen to essay about picnic simply instruct the aforesaid inhabitants and chocolat joanne harris essay residents in the Catholic faith and train them in good morals without forbidding violence or aggressive behaviors (Davenport 77). He places ultimate responsibility in the Spanish themselves with the threat of excommunication should they or any other nations disobey his instructions. The thought that future power might be lost must surely have been enough to convince nations to heed the pope's warning and demarcations of land. Inter caetera : The Grand-Pappy of Colonization. (31) Alexander VI's Inter caetera not only reinforces the ability of popes to report writing deny proclamations issued before their decisions but also created precedence for future charters and approval of New World land.

Papal rule and influence had historically motivated Christians to chocolat essay war, and the bull Inter caetera laid the foundations for Spanish conquest and a pope's ability to determine who and what could be ruled by Christian kings. Once a bull allowed a king to character send colonists to a foreign land, that land would be led in Catholicism with the king's ultimate power flowing from the Holy See. Chocolat Harris Essay? Heathens were not considered deserving of land or power, and at no time were they considered as the owners of their land or as being entitled to any role in connection with its disposition (Dickason 38-39). Thus, the Catholic Church had managed to convince believers of its power and influence in determining the fate of New World land and peoples. Bulls such as Inter caetera solidified papal say in colonization while distancing the Church from any ultimate responsibility in about the treatment of nonbelievers inhabiting those lands. For the centuries following, the holy precedent of legal charters and grants became an chocolat joanne harris essay everyday occurrence and a natural part of political life. Barraclough, Geoffrey.

The Medieval Papacy . London: Thames and Hudson, 1968. Davenport, Frances G, ed. Argument Essay? European Treaties bearing on the History of the United States and chocolat joanne its Dependencies to 1648 . Washington: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1917. Green, L.C., and Olive P. Dickason. The Law of Nations and the New World . Alberta: U of Alberta P, 1989. Erdman, Carl. The Origin of the Idea of Crusade . Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977. Translated from Die Entstehung des Kreuzzegsgedankens by W. Kohlhammer Verlag. Stuggart, 1935. Muldoon, James, ed.

The Expansion of Europe: The First Phase . Philadelphia: U of Pennsylvania P, 1977. Williams, Robert A., Jr. Essay? The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest . New York: Oxford UP, 1990.

Essay Writer for All Kinds of Papers -
Chocolat Essays | GradeSaver

Fresh Ink: Essays From Boston College's First-Year Writing Seminar. “Hey, which one are you? Are you Andy or Colin?” Damn it. I was trapped. Chocolat Joanne Harris? I turned around to see who had accosted me. Character Analysis Essay Handout? It was Bridget.

She sits in joanne front of me in Spanish, and behind my twin brother in Religion. “Umm. I'm Colin,” I managed to say, hesitating as if I was actually contemplating what my real name was. “Really? Because I was gonna guess that, but I didn't want to sound stupid if I guessed wrong.” She was unusually cheerful about playing the “guess the twin” game. “No . you wouldn't have sounded stupid,” I replied. “The way I see it, you have a fifty-fifty chance of getting me right.” I usually tell this to everyone who attempts to guess my identity, like I was some probability game. “Okay, good,” she said, as she began to push me against the hallway lockers, “Let me look at your face so I can see the differences. I've already looked at Andy.” “What?” I mustered, but Bridget was too strong. I was pinned against my locker being examined as if I were some rare species.

She started touching my hair, and poking my cheeks. She closed one eye, then the other, then both. Her little game had gone on stress disorder essay, far enough. Chocolat Joanne? I was not her lab rat to be poked and prodded. I tried to break free of her hold, but she seized me with both arms in a sort of suffocating embrace. “Well, I think I found the difference. Programs? I'm gonna go find Andy. I think I got you two down now.” With her observations complete, I was left standing trying to catch my breath.

“You could just ask what my name is,” I shouted after her, “it's not like I'd mind it.” If you haven't guessed yet, I happen to be a twin. In fact, I account for one out of every thirty-two births (Twin Facts). Essay? I guess that makes me special, right? As a monozygotic individual, I am used to certain things. “Which one are you?” happens to be the most popular question that I am asked, which is almost always followed by “You're Colin. Introduction To Thesis Report? No, wait, you're Andy!” I have two names: one was given to me at joanne harris essay, birth, and the other is essay about picnic, usually thrust upon me in a random, haphazard way. But I've gotten used to responding to both Colin and Andy; it's just something identical twins do. As an identical twin I am also used to chocolat joanne essay sharing. The Design? I have shared just about joanne harris essay everything I have: toys, Batman, friends, and argument, an identity. I am usually not considered a single individual, but rather, I am just one half of a “twin unit.” It's a good thing I am best friends with my other half, because if not, my life could get difficult.

Rosemary Theroux, a sociologist and psychologist who has studied twins of essay all forms for post stress essay, over twenty years, states that identical twins share a friendship that is chocolat joanne harris, closer than any other relationship between human beings (6). This is top creative writing, understandable given that my brother and I shared a very cramped fetal “apartment” for nine months. You don't get closer than that. But just because we split from the same egg, doesn't mean that we “share a soul” or something. My twin brother and I are as different from each other as caramel sauce is from gravy. We have different personalities, we enjoy different kinds of music, and chocolat joanne, I am even taller than he is (by a quarter of an inch). Character Essay Handout? We are different; separate; individual.

I have always been taught that I should maintain my own individuality; that I should be my own person. But if people are constantly mistaking me for my twin, how can I be my own person with my own identity? For nearly nineteen years I have been confused, mixed up, and mistaken. Do I have my own identity, or am I just one piece of a two-part special? Lynn Perlman, a psychologist and twin herself, explains that the transition of chocolat twins from the post traumatic disorder, twin unit to separate individuals can be a difficult process. It's a process that must be made on a “child-by-child” basis (2). There are, however, many things parents, family, and friends can do to support a twin's individuality. Or, at harris, the very least, there are things that can be avoided to promote individuality among twins. The Bobbsie Twins. Twinsburg, Ohio is about, home to a festival that is unlike most festivals.

If you haven't guessed from the town's name, Twinsburg, Ohio hosts the world's largest twin festival. It's a time when twins can dress up in matching outfits and not feel like they are under scrutiny. There is actually a competition for the most identical twins (I have no idea how they judge this contest). This type of behavior is what I am discouraging. In order for both individuals to harris essay become independent, twins should attempt to look and dress differently from the top creative writing programs, other. Different appearances not only joanne harris essay, allow outsiders to differentiate the two, but twins also learn to view themselves as individuals, not as a combined unit (Friedrich 238). Looking through old picture albums, I can only remember seeing one picture out of character analysis essay hundreds where my twin and I were dressed in matching outfits. As you can imagine, it was taken while we were both toddlers, during the peak of our terrible twos. We were dressed in matching sailor's outfits, with matching hats to boot. I was in red and my brother was in joanne essay blue.

We were the analysis, exact same, just in different colors. After this photo op, my mom realized that this Doublemint Gum-twins attitude was not going to chocolat joanne fly. Years later when I commented on top creative writing programs, this lack of Bobbsie twin moments, my mom just smiled. She told me matching twins were “the cutest” things she'd ever seen, but that had to stop. If we were ever to become Colin and chocolat joanne essay, Andy, we were going to have to programs dress like Colin and Andy, not as “the twins.”

Many experts argue that twin names should also be different (Theroux 8). We don't want names like Timmy and harris essay, Tommy, or Billy and Bobby. Elizabeth Friedrich, author of The Parent's Guide to traumatic stress disorder Raising Twins , wasn't one of the select few on this planet to be born a twin, or a multiple for that matter, but after years of harris essay research on twins and multiples alike, she has become a voice amid the argument essay, confusion of twins. Friedrich contends that names that sound similar will only lead to chocolat joanne harris essay more confusion (238). I know identical twin girls who are name Kristen and introduction report, Kirsten. Do you think they're happy? To foster individuality, parents, relatives, and chocolat essay, friends should call twins by their individual names, which are hopefully dissimilar.

Calling me Colin and essay about picnic, my brother Andy helps reinforce our identities (Theorux 8). Calling younger twins by chocolat joanne their names not only helps them learn their own names, but it also helps siblings and friends learn the separate names of twins (Friedrich 238). I remember my mom telling me that my younger, singleton, brother didn't know my name until he was four. To my brother, it was Andy and analysis, Andy. I guess having two brothers that were identical in joanne every possible way confused him. Competitions and essay, Comparisons. As a twin, there was always someone who was right there with me. As I mentioned earlier, Andy and I were in all of the same classes and we played all of the chocolat, same sports. Andy was this person that I could immediately compare myself to, whether it be through academics or athletics (Stewart 102). I have constantly been asked, “Which is the smarter twin?” and “Which is report, better at sports?” or the question that always annoyed me, “Which twin is the evil twin?” These questions automatically establish comparisons, so whether or not Andy or I knew it, competition always took place (Friedrich 246). According to Elizabeth Stewart, author of Exploring Twins and a psychologist who has studied relationships between infant twins, competition between twins starts at an early age (Stewart 102).

Competitions to harris eat first, or have the easy, best toy dump truck can seem insignificant, but these competitions soon escalate to more serious matters. When I was eight I would constantly ask my parents which twin they loved more. Chocolat Harris Essay? Competition for parental affection was constant. I always wanted to impress my parents the most, and the design argument, so did Andy. We would have races for everything: crawling up the stairs, eating hotdogs, biking to school, drawing a picture. My youngest brother was always kind of chocolat harris shoved into the background during this stage of analysis handout my life. Chocolat Essay? Competition for the top grade was unspoken, but was by far the most intense competition of them all. I had to get an the design ‘A’ on the science test because Andy was going to get an chocolat essay ‘A’ and I didn't want to be “the stupid twin.” This period of picnic competition probably lasted until sophomore year in high school. Joanne Essay? It was at this time that we realized that we were equals; or, rather, we had proven ourselves equal. Throughout these races and writing, competitions the bond between my brother and me only chocolat joanne essay, increased.

Stewart explains that in competition, the programs, bond between twins may strengthen (103). I may have won the first race, that is to say I may have been born first, but Andy was a close second. Chocolat? Andy pushes me to do the easy vacations, best that I can, and I do the same for him. Our competitions were always friendly in nature. Joanne? Andy and are roughly equal in whatever we do, and because of our abilities, I feel that we have only grown closer through our competitions. There is argument essay, one thing, however, that I do not like about twinhood, and essay, that is the comparison game.

I don't like the questions that ask which twin is better at this, or which twin is better at that. I will accept physical comparisons, because these generally involve observations. For example, my head is the design essay, slightly rounder and larger (like Charlie Brown's head), while Andy has a narrower, longer face and chin. Physical comparisons, like height and weight, or even shoe size (although I don't know why someone needed to know that) don't bother me because these comparisons can help people tell my brother and me apart. My grandma would never get us straight if she didn't know I have a scar on joanne harris essay, my nose from when I had the chicken pox. But don't ask me which twin is smarter, or which twin is cooler, because I'm not going to answer those questions. This may seem like an outlandish topic but you would be surprised how often it comes up in conversation. To be honest, I have never shared a telepathic connection with my brother. I cannot read his mind; I am unable to argument essay sense his emotions and feel his pains, and my brother can't either. I have never met a single pair of twins that has had any ESP-like experiences, but this whole telepathy thing sure makes a good story.

I think we have all heard about chocolat harris some bizarre twin studies. Argument? The studies that take twins and make them sit in adjacent rooms and draw pictures of objects one twin was looking at, or the chocolat joanne harris essay, experiments that ask twins to read the essay handout, other's mind. It's a bunch of nonsense if you ask me. Twins don't have telepathy, they don't share a brain, and they don't share a soul. Twins share their toys, but definitely not a brainwave. Twins can easily be clumped together as a unit; this much is certain. But the joanne essay, twin unit also tends to have another connotation in society. Writing? Twins can often be seen as “double trouble” (Stewart 160). I see it in chocolat essay movies, commercials, and top creative writing, advertisements.

Twins are supposed to be rowdy, fun-loving, prank-pulling units. They come at you two at a time, tag-team style. But this could not be farther from the truth. If the joanne, twins' personalities are prank-pulling tricksters, then yes, there will be twin shenanigans . My brother and programs, I, however, have yet to play one of these tricks. Joanne Harris? Call us boring, but we never were really interested in going to the other's classes. We went to a grade school with one class per grade, and, by random seating assignments, we were always at opposite corners of the classroom.

I don't know how it happened, but it even continued through high school, too. My brother and stress disorder essay, I never had the opportunity to switch classes or engage in such rabble-rousing. I guess we don't live up to the typical twin stereotype. Too Much Togetherness. Though my brother and I certainly break away from the “double trouble” stereotype, there is such a thing as “too much togetherness” (Friedrich 232). Chocolat Essay? Twins can come to depend on their twinhood for receiving attention and making new friends in new situations (Friedrich 232). It is of great debate whether twins should be separated in introduction report school. There is no universal answer to chocolat joanne harris this question. This issue needs to be resolved on an individual basis.

One such benefit of separating twins in school is that they will not have direct competition in the classroom (Theroux 112). There will be less of a chance of “twin shenanigans” (Theroux 112), and there will be less chance of easy on summer vacations “disruptive behavior” (Friedrich 260). Twins separated in harris school will have a better chance of developing individually and achieving a sense of essay about picnic independence from the “twin unit” (Perlman). One advantage of not separating twins in school, an chocolat essay advantage that I experienced, was not being alone in a new school. My brother and I went to top creative writing programs a Catholic high school, which no one from joanne harris essay, our grade school attended. We were the only ones we knew. It was a scary first day with all the new faces, but there was one face I knew. The same was true for college, only to a lesser degree. To Thesis Report? We were still best friends, but we had grown less dependent on each other. We had learned to make new, separate friends. Joanne Essay? We learned to be ourselves.

We learned to be individuals. Friedrich, Elizabeth and Cherry Rowland. The Parent's Guide to Raising Twins . Introduction To Thesis Report Writing? New York: St. Martin's Press, 1984. Perlman, Lynn. Am I an I or a We?

Twins Magazine . 2005. 24 Nov. 2006 http://twinsmagazine.com. Segal, Nancy 1. Joanne Harris Essay? Indivisible by Two . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005. Stewart, Elizabeth A. Character Handout? Exploring Twins . Chocolat Joanne Essay? New York: St.

Martin's Press, 2000.