* * *

It’s on Public PAIR, and it makes interesting reading. Just enter the publication number at http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair

In response to the first office action, the main claim was amended to claim a method of proposing marriage by converting a patent application into a marriage proposal. There was even an interview, where the applicant argued that the application had utility, because it was useful to him to propose to his intended.

The application eventually went abandoned due to failure to respond to the final office action, which rejected the claims as failing to comply with the written description requirement (section 112), being directed to nonpatentable subject matter and not being “useful” (section 101) and being obvious (section 103) in view of a prior patent on a method of drafting patent applications and a list of marriage proposal ideas retrieved from the Internet Wayback Machine.

* * *

So apparently he actually seriously prosecuted this patent at the PTO, even if it was tongue in cheek.