Exam-style questions, answered against the MPEPReviewed 9 November 2026
Patent Bar Practice QuestionsWysebridge Reference Take a timed practice exam

Patentability

Practice question: anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102

Answer in brief

This question tests the requirements for anticipation. Pick an answer before you open the explanation; the governing rule is in MPEP 2131.

An original practice question written by Wysebridge in the style of the exam. It is not a released USPTO question.

The question

Claim 1 recites a device with elements A, B and C. Reference X discloses A and B. Reference Y discloses C and states it can be used with devices like those in X. Can the examiner properly reject claim 1 as anticipated?

  1. Yes, because together X and Y disclose every element.
  2. Yes, if Y expressly references X.
  3. No; anticipation requires a single reference disclosing every element, arranged as claimed.
  4. No; anticipation can only be based on an issued U.S. patent.
  5. Yes, if the combination would have been obvious.

Answer and explanation

Show the answer

Answer: C. A claim is anticipated only if each and every element is found, expressly or inherently, in a single prior art reference, arranged as in the claim. Combining two references is an obviousness analysis under 35 U.S.C. 103, not anticipation. Prior art for anticipation is not limited to U.S. patents.

Where the rule lives

Read MPEP 2131 explained on MPEP.net, then find it in the official MPEP. On test day you will search the same text, so practice locating it yourself.

Sources for this entry

  1. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) USPTO
    The examination manual the patent bar is tested on; open book during the exam.
  2. Wysebridge — Patent bar exam simulator Wysebridge (publisher of this site)
    Timed AM/PM practice modeled on the Prometric test center.

Practical guidance is original editorial content. Company-published figures are the company's own claims and are labeled as such.

Continue this reading path

Practice question: obviousness after KSRPractice question: claim interpretation during examination

How the related websites connect

This is one of 19 coordinated Wysebridge references. The related sites answer neighboring questions and share the same publisher entity, Wysebridge. They are not independent endorsements.

See how every reference connects · Wysebridge's official website ↗

Cite or share this entry

Patent Bar Practice Questions. “Practice question: anticipation under 35 U.S.C. 102.” Wysebridge Reference. Content reviewed 9 November 2026.
https://patentbarpracticequestions.com/anticipation-question/