The 2022 Toteboards are now published

The 2022 US utility patent, US design patent, US plant patent, and US trademark registration toteboards are now published.  You can see them here:

I am grateful as always to the hundreds of firms that contributed their numbers to these toteboards.

Some firms have gotten in their numbers for the 2022 toteboards

The 2022 toteboards will get published in February of 2023.  Every year, we publish the toteboards, and after that, some firm comes in begging and pleading to hand in its numbers late.  Please don’t do that.  Please hand in your numbers before Tuesday, January 24, 2023!

As of just now, lots of firms have already handed in their numbers for the 2022 toteboards:  Continue reading “Some firms have gotten in their numbers for the 2022 toteboards”

Incremental progress on finding ways to use Patent Public Search

Folks, I have experimented quite a bit in the past 24 hours, trying to figure out a bit more about how to trick the clunky Patent Public Search system into yielding up answers for the 2022 toteboards.  Here are my bits of incremental progress on ways to trick the PPS search system into giving you numbers that you might be able to use for the toteboards.

The date search portion of the search.   To get patents issuing in calendar 2022, it looks like either of these search strings might work:

@PD>=”20220101″<=20221231

or

“2022”.py.

The latter is a smaller character count and is easier to type without error.  Maybe it executes faster in the PPS system.

The application type or patent type portion of the search.  To get, say, only utility patents, it looks like this might work:

(b1.AT. or b2.AT.)

This search string tries to get issued US utility patents that did not have a previous publication (B1) merged with issued US utility patents that did have a previous publication (B2).

To get, say, only plant patents, it looks like this might work:

(p2.at. or p3.at.)

This search string tries to get issued US plant patents that did not have a previous publication (P2) merged with issued US plant patents that did have a previous publication (P3).

To get, say, only design patents, it looks like this might work:

s.AT.

Recapping progress thus far.  Thus for example if you want to know simply how many utility patents issued in 2022, it looks like this might work:

(b1.AT. or b2.AT.) and “2022”.py.

The answer seems to be 322992 issued utility patents in 2022.

The number of design patents might work with this:

s.AT. and “2022”.py.

The answer seems to be 34158 issued design patents in 2022.

The number of plant patents might work with this:

(p2.AT. or p3.AT.) and “2022”.py.

The answer seems to be 1072 issued plant patents in 2022.

Narrowing it down to the firm name.    We can then use any of the previous three search strings along with further field searching to try to narrow the search down to the firm name.  The poor documentation for PPS suggests that any of the following might possibly yield legal-representative-specific results:

    • .att.  – said to mean “Attorney/agent/firm”
    • .atty. – said to mean “Attorney name”
    • .firm. – said to mean “Legal Firm Name”
    • .inaa. – said to mean “Legal Representative or Inventor”
    • .lrag. – said to mean “Legal Representative Name”
    • .lrnm. – said to mean “Legal Representative Name”
    • .lrfm. – said to mean “Legal Firm Name”

Within any one of these fields, the hapless searcher might want to try any of several proximity operators:  ADJ, ADJ(n), NEAR, NEAR(n), WITH, WITH(n), SAME, or SAME(n).  Some searchers will try AND within a field search.  Toteboard searchers have tried strings including:

    • (plinge AND llp).att.
    • baker adj charlie.lrfm.
    • (able and charlie).lrfm

Yes, it looks like you can omit the parentheses because I guess “ADJ” binds more strongly than the field name.

For our firm, the following search strings seemed to work:

    • oppedahl.att. (“Attorney/agent/firm”)
    • oppedahl.atty. (“Attorney name”)
    • oppedahl.firm. (“Legal Firm Name”)
    • oppedahl.lrfm. (“Legal Firm Name”)

The following search strings came up empty:

    • oppedahl.inaa. (“Legal Representative or Inventor”)
    • oppedahl.lrag. (“Legal Representative Name”)
    • oppedahl.lrnm. (“Legal Representative Name”)

One firm tried a search like this:

(((“Plinge Patent Law”).firm. OR (“Plinge Patent Law”).inaa. OR (“Plinge Patent Law”).lrag. OR (“Plinge Patent Law”).lrnm. OR (“Plinge Patent Law”).lrfm. )

Part of what the firm was doing, I guess, was trying to get the benefit of any of the search fields that might possibly work (inaa, lrag, and so on).  Another part of what the firm was doing, I guess, was to put three words of the firm name into quotation marks, to try to exclude nuisance hits from other firms with somewhat similar firm names.

How to do a toteboard search?

Hello readers and colleagues.  Within a few weeks, based on numbers reported by you, we will be posting the 2022 toteboards.  This includes the following:

    • The Eighth Annual utility patent toteboard.
    • The Eleventh Annual design patent toteboard.
    • The Fourth Annual  plant patent toteboard.

For ten years now, it has been quite easy to do a search in the US Patent Full-Text Database to get numbers that you could send in for the toteboards.  But now in 2023, such searches are nearly impossible.  This blog article tries to help a little with doing such searches in 2023.  Continue reading “How to do a toteboard search?”

Get your numbers in for the 2022 toteboards

(Update:  I have collected some information from readers in this blog article about how to try to do toteboard searches in the new and poorly designed Patent Public Search system.)

Hello colleagues.   It is time to get your numbers in for the 2022 toteboards.  The toteboards have a goal of recognizing the intellectual property firms that filed the most US utility patent applications, filed the most US design patent applications, filed the most US plant patent applications, and filed the most US trademark applications, and saw them through to issuance and registration.

The submission forms will close on Tuesday, January 24, 2023.    Please don’t dawdle with this.  Please just hand in your numbers and be done with it.

The 2022 toteboards will get published in February of 2023.  Every year, we publish the toteboards, and after that, some firm comes in begging and pleading to hand in its numbers late.  Please don’t do that.  Please hand in your numbers before Tuesday, January 24, 2023!

You can see the past toteboards, including the 2021 toteboards, here.

    • To hand in your numbers for the Eighth Annual utility patent toteboard, click here.
    • To hand in your numbers for the Eighth Annual trademark toteboard, click here.
    • To hand in your numbers for the Eleventh Annual design patent toteboard, click here.
    • To hand in your numbers for the Fourth Annual  plant patent toteboard, click here.

USPTO responses will be timely on Tuesday, January 3

Monday, January 2 will be a federal holiday in the District of Columbia.  This means the USPTO will be closed on Monday, January 2.  This means that any response or action that would have been due at the USPTO on Saturday, December 31,  or Sunday, January 1, or Monday, January 2 will be timely if carried out on Tuesday, January 3.

The US Postal Service will likewise be closed on Monday, January 2.

USPTO responses will be timely on Tuesday, December 27

Monday, December 26 will be a federal holiday in the District of Columbia.  This means the USPTO will be closed on Monday, December 26.  This means that any response or action that would have been due at the USPTO on Saturday, December 24,  or Sunday, December 25, or Monday, December 26 will be timely if carried out on Tuesday, December 27.

The US Postal Service will likewise be closed on Monday, December 26.

US filers and filing at WIPO and daylight saving time

Keep in mind that most locations in the US will turn off daylight saving time today (November 6, 2022), but today is not the day that Switzerland will turn off daylight saving time.  (Switzerland turned off DST a week ago.)

Those who are filing documents at the International Bureau — documents that need a same-day filing date — should check to make sure they know what time it is in Switzerland as of today.

The main point here is that for a US filer, everything is now “back to normal”.  Whatever time zone offset a US filer is accustomed to between his or her time zone and Geneva, that offset is back to normal.

ePCT will tell you what time it is in Switzerland.

How often do you check the Systems Status page?

click to enlarge

If you regularly make use of TEAS or PAIR or Patentcenter or EFS-Web, you probably find yourself checking the USPTO Systems Status and Availability web page (screen shot at right) from time to time.

Wouldn’t it be nice if somehow you could be notified automatically when that web page changes?  Well, now you can be notified automatically, if you choose to participate in a beta test of my new change-detection system.  Continue reading “How often do you check the Systems Status page?”