FALL 2005

Introduction to Intellectual Property

Course No. 9200 700, 9200 800
Tu 6:30 - 9:30 p.m.
Room W-206
Professor Jay Dratler, Jr.
Room 231D (IP Alcove)
(330) 972-7972
dratler@uakron.edu, dratler@neo.rr.com
Copyright © 2003, 2004, 2005  Jay Dratler, Jr.   For permission, see CMI.


Introduction to Intellectual Property, Fall 2005

University of Akron School of Law


    [The following examination was given in Spring 2004.  Please be aware that course content and emphasis vary from year to year.  Your actual exam may test or emphasize different material, and your time and word limits may be shorter.]

Final Examination


1.  E-mail At-home Examination.  This is an e-mail, at-home examination.  Subject to the limitations stated below, you are free to take it at any time and place of your choosing.

2.  Limitations.  Your completion of this examination will be subject to the following limitations:
    a.  Time-spent limitation: five hours.  You may work a total of no more than five hours on this examination (including any related research and thinking), from the time you begin to read the instructions until the time you send in your answers.  Except under extraordinary circumstances, such as an intervening family emergency, your work time should be continuous and uninterrupted.  Each question has a suggested time limit, and the weight of each question for grading is proportional to the suggested time for answering it.
    b.  Elapsed-time limitation: 36 hours.  Your answers will be due by midnight, Friday, December 10, 2004, no more than thirty-six hours after the exam is distributed by e-mail.  Late answers will be downgraded.
    c.  Word limit: 3,000 words.  Your answers must total no more than 3,000 words.  If your answers exceed this limit, I will arbitrarily stop reading after the 3,000th word, and you will lose points for any and all material thereafter.
    If you inadvertently exceed the word limit, it will be to your advantage to delete less important material and to keep more important material that is likely to garner you more points.  (Most word-processing programs count words automatically; check "Properties" under "File" or consult your program's "Help" screens.)
    d.  No Consultation.  During the entire examination interval (from the time you receive the examination until you submit your answers), you may not consult with anyone regarding the examination, this course, the subject matter of this course, or any related case, regulation, or statute.
    e.  No "canned" answers.  These questions are designed to elicit specific answers in response to specific fact patterns and specific queries.  Nonresponsive material, no matter how correct, cogent, or even brilliant, will receive no credit whatsoever.  I will enforce this rule even more strictly than usual, in order to discourage anyone from using "canned" material prepared in anticipation of the questions to be asked.
    f.  Honor system.  Please include the usual honor-system oath in your examination.  (Your exam number (at the end of your exam file) and your return e-mail address will constitute your electronic signature under the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act.)
3.  Materials.  Because this is an at-home exam, you may use any written materials that you have on hand, provided they are: (1) published or (2) prepared by you.  You may also use your computer to browse the Web, including the material posted for this course on the Law School's Website.  However, the questions have been designed so that the following materials should be sufficient: (1) the casebook, supplement, and Website for this class (including any materials from it that you have downloaded, printed out and annotated), (2) any statutory supplement that you have used for this class (including your own, but no one else's, annotations); and (3) an outline that you have prepared.  I encourage you to make your outline short, both so it will be usable and so you will have an "overview" of the course.

4.  Strategy for Answering the Questions.  
    a.  Outlines.  To the extent intelligible, outlines will receive partial credit, but you should have time to write complete answers.
    b.   Additional facts.  Please do not assume or make up additional facts.  Although the stated facts may resemble real situations, all of the stated facts are fictitious (except as noted).  All facts needed to answer each question should appear in the question itself.  If you think you need additional information to answer a question fully, state what additional information you need, how you would use it, and how it would affect your conclusions, but please be brief.  Do not waste time answering questions or addressing issues not fairly presented by the given facts.
    c.  Organization. Especially in view of the word limit, try to make every word count.  Well-organized answers will receive extra credit, and poor organization may result in a loss of points.
    d.  Legal authority.  You will receive points for identifying specific and relevant legal authority, such as a particular statutory section, subsection, or decision.  You may use reasonable abbreviations, as long as they are clear.  For example, you may refer to Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co. simply as Qualitex or the "press pad case."
    e.  Fact pattern questions: using IRAC.  Most questions are typical law-school examination questions involving complex fact patterns.  You should answer them by identifying relevant issues and applying the IRAC formula (issue, rule, analysis, and conclusion).  Do not forget to state a conclusion, as well as your confidence in its certainty, for each issue and subissue.  You should be aware, however, that a correct conclusion with little analysis will garner you less points than an incorrect conclusion with thoughtful and thorough analysis.
    Try to weave as many specific facts as possible into your analysis, make and evaluate arguments for both sides, and determine the relative importance of issues and arguments.  Where alternative legal rules exist, you should state them and indicate which is the majority view, the current trend, or otherwise the better rule, and why.  (Stating why one variant rule is better than another often involves policy.)
    You will not have enough time or space to cover all issues or arguments in exhaustive detail.  Therefore you should focus your discussion on the issues, rules, and arguments that are most important.  Grading will be based in part on your judgments of relative importance and how specifically you address the stated facts.  Analogies to and distinctions from precedent, if useful and relevant, will receive extra points.
    f.  Logical "Trees."  Do not neglect to analyze all relevant branches of a logical tree, even if your analysis suggests that one branch should be cut off.  That is, try to cover all important issues, even if you think that the resolution of a single issue should control the result.  For example, you should discuss infringement—insofar as the facts permit—even if you conclude it is doubtful that the plaintiff has a valid trademark, patent, or copyright. (In other words, pretend that you are a district court, which might be reversed on any point, rather than a court of last resort.)
    If an issue clearly raised by the facts is easy to resolve, you may say so without extensive discussion, as long as you say why.  You should not waste time and space elaborating "giveaway" issues.   Where the issues are close or not clearly resolved, however, you should analyze them completely.
    g.  Policy.  Please discuss policy only where the question calls for a discussion of policy, or where discussion of policy is necessary to resolve a legal issue.  You should always discuss the "law" first, including black letter law, trends, and minority views, before turning to policy for confirmation or to resolve doubt.  Where the resolution of an issue is unclear, however, you should analyze how applicable policy affects your conclusion.  (The last question here calls for discussion of policy and should be treated accordingly.)

6.  Submitting your Answers.  Detailed instructions for submitting your answers are at the end of the examination.  Please follow them carefully.

Good luck!

(one hour)


During the 1990s, three separate inventors independently discovered the same invention.  The invention is body armor made from a special easily-formed plastic which, when hardened in wide strips, is strong enough to stop bullets.  We will call this material Plastic X.

Inventor A, a retired chemist, made this invention by accident.  He had been trying to make a plastic that would retain its color without fading, even in strong sunlight.  He first made a batch of Plastic X in July 1996 and left it outside his summer home to test its color-fading characteristics.  Its color faded quickly, and he lost interest in the compound.  It was not until the next spring, in April 1997, that he accidentally discovered its strength when his son used it for target practice with his 22 caliber rifle.

Inventor A made a mental note of this phenomenon and told his son not to tell anyone, but he did nothing about it until the next summer, when he made strips of the plastic and fired at them with firearms of various calibers.   After confirming their bulletproof character in August 1998, Inventor A filed a U.S. patent application for body armor made of Plastic X early the next year, in January 1999.


Inventor B is a theoretical research chemist at Mammoth Chemical Co., a subsidiary of a giant defense firm.  While working with computer-simulated models of plastic molecules in June 1997, she conceived the chemical structure of Plastic X and predicted that it would be extremely hard and resilient.  From the chemical structure, it was easy for Inventor B to deduce how to make the compound.  She immediately disclosed her discovery to the director of the research laboratory at Mammoth Chemical Co., who immediately contacted in-house patent counsel.

In July 1997, Inventor B prepared an article on Plastic X for a national chemical journal.  The article provided the chemical formula of Plastic X, described how to make it, and discussed its use in body armor.   It appeared in print in December 1997.

Mammoth Chemical Co., filed a U.S. patent application in Inventor B's name for body armor using Plastic X in March 1998.   No one at Mammoth, including Inventor B, has ever made any Plastic X.


Inventor C is a research scientist in Daiichi Plastics Co., a Japanese firm that manufactures speciality plastics.  He made a batch of Plastic X in Japan in June 1994 and recognized its strength and resiliency immediately.  He could think of no particular use for it, however, until a U.S. visitor to his plant in December 1995 suggested that it might be useful in the defense industry.

In July 1996, Inventor C made baseball-sized spheres of Plastic X and sent them to four U.S. manufacturers of defense and law-enforcement products for testing.  Two of the manufacturers did nothing with the spheres, and one tried but failed to develop a projectile using them.  The fourth manufacturer, however, returned the spheres to Inventor C and asked him to produce a substantial number of thick, wide strips of Plastic X, which he did.

In October 1996, Inventor C sent the sample strips from Japan to the fourth manufacturer in the United States.  The latter immediately wove them into body armor and sent the armor to the United States Army for evaluation.  In April 1997, after six months of field testing, the United States Army placed a large order with the fourth manufacturer for the body armor.  Neither Inventor C nor the fourth manufacturer ever attempted to patent body armor using Plastic X.


On the basis of these facts, please analyze which, if any, of Inventors A or B should receive a United States patent on body armor using Plastic X.

(Ninety Minutes)


Pennwalt Swimgear Co. (PSC) makes inflatable floats, rafts and lifesavers for children and adults.  Alice, an employee and officer of PSC, is PSC's chief product designer and product manager.  After having a dream about friendly sharks swimming with children, she conceives the idea of making a new product line of inflatable floats for young children in the form of sharks.  To Alice's knowledge, no one has produced such a line of products before.

Alice's friend Bob is a retired sculptor who, during his career, specialized in sea- life sculptures.  She mentions her new concept to Bob and asks him if he would like to prepare a model for the new products.

Bob likes the idea, but he no longer has a studio of his own.  Alice tells him that that doesn't matter because models for PSC's plastic inflatable toys are sculpted from a special, light plastic foam of PSC's own design.  The plastic foam is available only in PSC's design studio, which no one uses on weekends.  So Bob can work at PSC on the weekends to prepare a model for PSC's new "shark-like" line of products.

Although Bob doesn't need money, his children are in financial trouble, so Bob gets Alice to agree that he will receive 10% of the wholesale price of each shark float sold by PSC using his design.  Alice and Bob agree with a handshake (and nothing in writing) and Bob begins work.

Bob begins work by going to libraries to look at pictures of sharks and to aquariums to see them swim.  He spends several days doing this; then he makes a dozen or so sketches at home.  Finally, we he feels he is ready, he asks Alice to prepare a large blob of the sculpting foam and begins working at PSC's studio sculpting a model shark for the floats from his sketches.  During the week, his unfinished work is stored in a closet at PSC so that PSC's regular design work can be done.

After two weekends of sculpting, Bob asks Alice to take a look at his work.  She likes the size and sleekness of Bob's model, but she thinks it is too realistic, and therefore too scary, for children.  She suggests that Bob make the fins stubbier, the teeth shorter and fatter, and the gills narrower and less prominent, in order to create a "friendly" appearance for children.  

Bob agrees.  The next weekend, he works on the fins and succeeds in giving them a stubby, "cartoonish" look without completely destroying their realism.  On the way home from PSC, however, Bob is seriously injured in a traffic accident.  The doctors say he won't be able to work again for six months.


Unfortunately, Alice has already promised her superiors a new product line soon, so she cannot wait for Bob's recovery.  To keep the project on schedule, Alice hires Carol, a promising cartoonist and animator who does sculpting on the side.  Alice asks Carol to finish Bob's work.

Before hiring Carol, Alice carefully explains to her the nature and history of the project, the need to stay on schedule, and the need to make Bob's too-realistic sculpture more cartoonish and child-friendly.  Alice shows Carol Bob's sketches and explains how Bob made the fins stubby and cartoonish without destroying realism.  She then asks Carol to do the same with the teeth, the gills and the overall shape of the shark.  Carol agrees.

As with Bob, the deal is made with a handshake and nothing in writing.  Carol agrees to finish the sculpture that Bob started for a lump sum of $1,500.  Because she lives far away from PSC, however, she insists on working in her own studio, and Alice agrees.  Alice has Bob's unfinished model delivered to Carol's home studio, and Carol begins work where Bob left off.

Because Alice doesn't know Carol as well as she knows Bob, however, Alice insists on closer creative control.  Alice has Carol install a Web camera in Carol's studio, aimed at the sculpture, so that Alice can use the Internet to monitor exactly how Carol's work is progressing.

Each day, Alice consults with Carol by telephone, asking her to change this or that.  For example, Alice asks Carol to make fewer, rounder teeth, to decrease the number of gill slits, and to make the sharks "skin" smoother, with just a few token "scales" here and there.  Carol does as she is told, and the sculpture is soon finished and ready for production.


Production is not as easy as anticipated, however.   Changing from the medium of the foam sculpture to an inflatable plastic doll imposes certain limitations on curvature and sharpness of lines.  Alice works with PSC's production people to make the necessary changes and, at the same time, to preserve the "child-friendly" and artistic nature of the product.  Finally, after two weeks of hard work with PSC's production people, the mold for the plastic inflatable toy is finished, and PSC begins to mass produce the floats.

Each of PSC's "shark-like" floats is made of iridescent red plastic.  When properly inflated, its shape follows the sculpted model, with the changes made by Alice to facilitate production.

With the help of in-house artists employed full time by PSC, Alice adds a few final visual touches.   She has the teeth painted a stark white, and a few dark lines painted on the fins to emphasize their "shark-like" quality.  Finally, has PSC's house trademark, the word "Pennwalt" in bright, iridescent green, flowing script letters, put just below the "shark's" teeth.

PSC begins to sell these inflatable "shark-like" floats in three sizes for children of various ages, and they are highly successful.  Within a month, they become PSC's most popular product line.


Two months later, Dollar Swimgear, Inc.  (DSI) comes out with a very similar line of products.  It begins selling three lines of "shark-like" inflatable floats that are exactly the same size as PSC's.

There are, however, some differences between DSI's floats and PSC's.  First, the fins and teeth of DSI's "sharks" are noticeably longer, less cartoonish, and more realistic than those of PSC's "sharks."  Second, DSI's floats are made of a bright iridescent orange plastic, and the teeth of its "sharks" are painted grey.  Finally, the legend underneath the teeth of DSI's "sharks" reads "Dollar," albeit in the same flowing script and same bright, iridescent green used on PSC's floats.


Alice has hired you as special counsel to analyze whether PSC can stop DSI from making and marketing its similar "shark" floats and/or get damages for DSI's past sales.  Please write Alice a memo analyzing: (1) who owns the copyright in PSC's "shark-like" floats; (2) the probability of success of a copyright infringement action by PSC against DSI; (3) how any monetary recovery against DSI for infringement of copyright should be distributed; and (4) the probability of success of any other reasonable cause(s) of action (discussed in this course!) by PSC against DSI.  Be sure to consider all reasonable defenses.  

(Ninety Minutes)
(Short essay questions)


For each of the following trade symbols, analyze briefly, in at most three or four sentences, how "strong" the symbol is in the stated application, whether the federal Patent and Trademark Office would register it on the principal register for that application, and, if so, whether a showing of secondary meaning would be required.  (Assume that none of these marks has ever been used before in the stated application.)

    1.  "The Woofer" for a set of ultra-loud "boom-box" speakers for cars.
    2.   "Guillotine" for a vegetable slicer.
    3.   "People" for a magazine about celebrities.
    4.   "Absolute" for men's clothing.
    5.   "HardData" for a database of difficult-to-find information, to be stored on the hard drives of personal computers.
    6.   Clear (transparent) packaging for candy and other confections.


Paula has developed a new concept for a cookware store.  She would like to open a small store selling cookware and cooking utensils, in which "chefs" would demonstrate each type of product continuously at the point of sale.  For example, a man in a chef's hat might use a garlic press to prepare garlic bread, for sampling by customers, in a toaster over.  Behind the table on which he prepares the garlic bread would be large bins of the garlic presses and stacks of boxes containing the toaster ovens—all presented for sale.

The store would offer only twenty or so major products per day, but the kinds of products offered in this way would rotate from day to day.  Each product sales area would have small, red chairs around the white service table at which customers could sit while they sampled the food and discussed the products with the "chef," who would be knowledgeable about both the products and the food samples.  Three walls of the store would contain floor-to-ceiling blackboard "menus," showing the dishes available each day (for free), the products used to prepare them, and the price of each product.

Paula has prepared a list of elite suppliers of cookware products—mostly foreign—whose products are hard to get in the United States.  By charging premium prices for their products, she hopes to offset the cost of the demonstrations and free samples of food.  She has carefully calculated the "right" retail price for each such product, and her list contains those prices.

Before she can open her store, however, Paula must have start-up capital.  To attract investment, she has described her concept in detail, including pricing, in a written business plan.

One month after Paula gave her business plan to her first prospective investor, a new cookware store opened in Cuyahoga Falls with all the features described above.  The same products listed in Paula's business plan were offered by this store, and the retail prices were the same as those listed in Paula's business plan, within one percent.  The owner of the new store is the brother-in-law of the investor to whom Paula submitted her business plan.  Analyze whether Paula has any legal recourse.


Dave has been an auto mechanic for over twenty years.  Over the years, he has acquired a substantial home workshop, in which he experiments with various mechanical devices.

One problem Dave has worked on in his home workshop is hardening punch bits.  A punch bit—the working part of a tool to punch holes in metal—is a small, shaped piece of hardened steel with a sharpened (usually circular) end.  Because punches work under tremendous pressure and build up lots of heat, punch bits wear out rapidly and have to be sharpened or replaced often.

After several years of experimentation, Dave has discovered a method of treating certain metal alloys with heat and chemicals to make an astoundingly long-lasting punch bit.  He lent a prototype to his employer (the auto shop) on a confidential basis, and the employer found that Dave's punch bit lasted twenty times as long as conventional ones.

Without Dave asking, Dave's employer has written to several large companies that make machine tools, describing the amazing properties of Dave's punch bit.  The employer also has arranged for Dave to meet with product managers for three of these companies next month.  Write a short memo advising Dave what he should do to protect his ability to profit from his discovery.


Acme Personal Care Products Co. has developed a product it calls the "Vibra-Sonic" Massager.  The product is a hand-held personal massaging device with a rechargeable battery.   It has irregular rubber wheels that rotate to give a massaging effect.  It also uses ultrasonic generators to inject ultrasonic energy into sore muscles.

This product came out of the prototype phase six months ago, and market testing since that time have revealed phenomenal consumer interest.  Already Acme has testimonials from scores of market-testing customers, saying how quickly this product soothed their sore muscles and put them back in shape for renewed athletics.

In anticipation of a major product release next month, Acme has spent over $200,000 preparing such things as radio and magazines advertisements, handbills, instructions sheets, and boxes and packaging for the new product.  All of these items give great emphasis to the trademark "Vibra-Sonic."

Unfortunately, Acme has never had trademark or IP counsel.  Its management has come to you, on the eve of its product rollout, to "make sure we can protect our product's name."  You commissioned a quick trademark search, and the search revealed the following:
    1.  Procter and Gamble Co. has filed an intent-to-use application to register the trademark "Vibra-Sonic" on the principal register at the federal Patent and Trademark Office for "ultrasonic toothbrushes and teeth-cleaning products."   The date of the application is January 13, 2004.
    2.  Bose Corp. has registered, on the principal register at the federal Patent and Trademark Office, the trademark "Vibra-Sound" for "acoustic speakers and stereo and quadrophonic audio equipment."  The date of the registration is April 20, 1987.  The records also show that this trademark became "incontestable" in 1993.
Your preliminary research on the Internet has determined that Bose Corp. is currently using its mark on the listed products, but you have been unable to find any evidence that Procter and Gamble has used its mark.   You doubt that either company would be willing to sell or license its registration or its mark to Acme.

Write a memo advising Acme what it should do.  Be sure to consider all reasonable alternatives, explain their respective risks and benefits, make a recommendation, and state what, if any, additional research you might do to clarify the risks.  As you write your memo, consider the value of tact in establishing a good client relationship.


Your closest friend is about to invest her life savings—and possibly mortgage her house!—to start a new business.  She doesn't have time to tell you much about the nature of her business, and it will be a long time, if ever, before she can afford your legal services on a paying basis.

All you know about her start-up business is that it is unlikely to produce anything patentable.  Like most businesses, however, it will produce and use copyrighted material, will have a trademark or a trade name, and may have trade secrets, if only a customer list.

Your friend knows nothing about intellectual property and had heard that you are an expert in that field.  She has asked you to make a short list things she should keep in mind in order to avoid major mistakes and to realize significant opportunities under the intellectual property laws.  Write that list for her, listing no more than a dozen points, with no more than a sentence or two for each.

(One Hour)

    "Our nation's intellectual property laws were born in controversy.  Thomas Jefferson wanted to include a ban on all monopolies in the Bill of Rights.  He and the other Framers knew from English experience, as economists now know with mathematical precision, that monopoly produces higher prices, lower output, reduced innovation, and poorer service, as compared to competition.  Yet James Madison and others argued for patent and copyright laws on the ground that they would encourage innovation and creativity.  While in France and occupied with affairs of state, Jefferson relented, and so our Patent and Copyright Clause was born."
    "Unlike England, we have no Statute of Monopolies to reveal the proper relationship of competition and intellectual property, as rule and exception.  It took another century for us to enshrine the principles of competition law, now recognized throughout the industrialized world, in our Sherman [Antitrust] Act of 1890."
    "Private interests used this ‘head start' for intellectual property to great advantage.  Over the years the scope of our intellectual property laws have expanded without any apparent limit.  We now have patents for pedestrian computer programs to do simple arithmetic and for business ‘methods,' which used to be subject to the rule of free competition.  A recent article reports patents on a method of swallowing a pill, as well as sports methods and procedures of psychological analysis."
    "Patent law is not the only field to show the stretch marks of this expansion.  Copyright now covers products from dinner plates to thank-you notes and prevents the disassembly of a lawfully purchased book to sell pictures within it.  Trademark law covers the aesthetic design of restaurants and the color of dry-cleaning press pads.  And judicial decisions, supposedly based on the common law (or on state statutes derived from the common law), have granted monopolies for such things as stock-index formulas and a certain way of pronouncing a celebrity's common first name.  No doubt children will soon have to get patent licences and releases under the law of ‘misappropriation' in order to do their sums."
    "All these recent developments have little to do with fostering human innovation and creativity, as Madison had hoped, and everything to do with the natural human desire to rest from the hard game of competition.  The quiet life of monopoly is infinitely attractive to those who must daily fight the fierce headwinds of business rivalry.  Yet as the English Parliament understood almost four centuries ago, free competition is what makes free markets work."
    "That's why we have anti-trust laws.  That's why Europe and Japan have competition law and anti-monopoly law, respectively.  The whole developed world knows that competition—even when it has to be compelled by law—is the key to societal success, and that the exclusive monopolies of intellectual property are limited exceptions, which must be carefully confined to their purpose."
    "In our own country, Thomas Jefferson understood this point over two centuries ago.  He relented in his opposition to monopoly only for a limited purpose, namely, ‘to Promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.'  Yet the last few decades have seen an expansion in intellectual property the likes of which Madison, let alone Jefferson, never would have imagined. Whereas once the motto of intellectual property might have been Jefferson's goal of giving ingenuity ‘a liberal encouragement,' today it is better phrased as ‘pigs at the trough.'"
Write an essay analyzing and approving or criticizing this passage.  Be sure to address all aspects of the passage, including: (1) its underlying assumptions about the rapid recent expansion of the scope of IP protection, the failure of that expansion to track the traditional purpose of IP law, and the relationship between the antitrust and IP laws; (2) its implied prediction of consequence—that the expansion will, in the long run, have negative effects on our economy, and (3) its judgment as to what is good policy and where the line between prohibiting monopoly and protecting IP should be drawn.   Your grade will depend not upon your point of view, but upon how carefully and specifically you support and document your analysis, with reference to the statutes, cases, constitutional provisions, and policies that we have studied.  The more specific and focused your analysis, the better your grade will be.


(See next page for submission instructions)



Please take all of the following steps in submitting your answers, before the deadline for submission:

1.  Include honor-code statement.  Make sure that your honor-code statement appears at the end of your answer file.  (Your examination number and e-mail header will constitute your signature under UETA.)

2.  Include your examination ID number.  Type your examination ID number at the end of your answer file and double-check it.  To avoid accidental breach of anonymity, make sure that your answer file contains no other identifying information.

3.  Spell-check and finalize.  Spell-check your answer file and make any necessary changes.  Check world length and modify as necessary.

4.  Save answer file with anonymous ID.  Save your answer file on your hard drive, with your honor-code statement and examination ID number at the end of the file.  When you save your file, use the file name "2005 Intro to IP Exam" and no other.  (If you use another file name, anonymity may be compromised.)

5.  Convert answer file to Rich Text Format.  If necessary, save your answer file again in Rich Text Format.  (Use the "Save As" feature of your Word Processor; then click on the down arrow to the right of the "File Type" field in the "Save As" dialogue box and select the "Rich Text Format (RTF)" option.  Be sure to verify that this option appears in the "File Type" field before you click the "Save" button.  Then check to see that a file with the name "2005 Intro to IP Exam.rtf" and a plain logo appears in your file folder.  You may have to click on "View" : "Details" to see the .rtf file extension.)

6.  Attach your RTF answer file to an e-mail message.  Send your answer file, in .rtf format, as an e-mail attachment to your message, not as part of the message itself.  The "Subject" line for your e-mail message should be "2005 Intro to IP Exam," and the text of the message should read "Attached are my answers."

(I will use your e-mail cover messages only to check that everyone has submitted answers.  I will not grade any exam until an assistant has "anonymized" the answers by separating the attached files from the e-mail messages and sending the attachments to me with no identifying information other than the examination ID number included in each file at the end.)

7.  Submit your answers by e-mail.  Send your cover message, with your .rtf answer file attached, to all of the following addresses:





(To avoid typing errors, please cut and paste this list into your e-mail program's "address" or "TO" field; then double-check all addresses and punctuation.  You may wish to prepare an address list in advance.)

8.  Print and retain a paper copy of your answer file.  Immediately after sending your e-mail message, print out a copy of your answers and staple the pages together.  Then sign and date your answers and record the exact time of your printout on the title page.  (If there is an e-mail mixup, this paper copy will serve to demonstrate what you wrote and when, in accordance with the honor system.)