It’s always nice when an Examiner understands SCORE. Continue reading “Good news – a design Examiner understands Score”
What it costs to get a US application on the Patent Prosecution Highway?
Previously I blogged about what it might cost to get a US application examined fast on Track I and by Accelerated Examination and by an old-fashioned Petition to Make Special and under Rule 496. Now let’s talk a bit about what it might cost to get a US application examined fast on the Patent Prosecution Highway. Continue reading “What it costs to get a US application on the Patent Prosecution Highway?”
What it costs to get a US application “advanced out of turn” under Rule 496?
Recently I blogged about what it might cost to get a US patent fast using Track I or Accelerated Examination or due to age or health of inventor. Here is another blog posting, this one about getting a US patent fast using Rule 496.
Some practitioners know about 37 CFR 1.496 (“Rule 496”). Rule 496 details a situation in which a US patent application that is the national phase of a PCT application will be “advanced out of turn for examination.” What should a practitioner charge for getting a case “advanced out of turn” under Rule 496? Continue reading “What it costs to get a US application “advanced out of turn” under Rule 496?”
Nice feature in WIPO’s DAS system – notifications
Yesterday for the first time I encountered a particularly nice feature
in WIPO’s Digital Access Service (DAS). The feature has been there for some time but yesterday was the first time I actually saw it work. The feature is that you can set up a sort of “tripwire” and when some Office retrieves a certified copy of one of your priority applications from DAS, you will receive an email message letting you know that this happened. Yesterday for the first time I received such an email.
Continue reading “Nice feature in WIPO’s DAS system – notifications”
Nice feature in ePCT – fee payments
There’s a nice new feature in ePCT. It used to be that if you were to file a new PCT application in RO/IB, and if you were to say that you plan to pay by means of a credit card, that what would happen is later (some days later) you would receive an email message with a link to a web page inviting you to pay the fees.
Now the ePCT system takes care of everything all at once. When you click “submit” to e-file the PCT application, and when you say you would like to pay the fee by credit card, then a new screen appears that permits you to type in the credit card number and other information. You can finish the e-filing session with the knowledge that you have indeed taken care of the fee payment.
This is good for several reasons.
First, it saves you having to docket to check for the arrival of the several-days-later email to pay the fee. (We estimate that every time we have to set and clear a docket, we incur an internal cost of something like $50.)
Second, it gets the fees into the RO’s hands sooner. Which means that the search fee gets into the hands of the ISA sooner. Which means the International Search Report and Written Opinion arrive sooner.
Extent to which metadata in PDF Documents filed in EFS-Web can be seen later?
There’s a discussion over in the EFS-Web listserv (the listserv for patent practitioners) about the best way to create a PDF so that it won’t unnecessarily reveal metadata. The answer for Windows users is of course to use CutePDF to create the PDF. Which then led to the question of the extent to which USPTO strips out metadata in which case maybe the filer can be lax about this. What is the answer? Continue reading “Extent to which metadata in PDF Documents filed in EFS-Web can be seen later?”
What it costs to get a US patent fast by making it “special” (age or health of inventor)?
When I was first in practice, there were a dozen ways to get a US patent application made “special”. Just to give a few examples, you could explain that a would-be investor needs to know whether a particular invention is patentable before constructing a factory. You could explain that you have found someone who infringes a claim of a patent application. You could point out that your subject matter would promote national security or fight terrorism or benefit the environment. You could establish that one of the inventors is in such poor health that the inventor might not live long enough to assist in the prosecution of the application. You could establish that one of the inventors is 65 years of age or older.
A few years ago the USPTO decided to pare down the list of ways to get a patent application made “special”. The list of ways is now very short. In this blog post I will talk about two of the remaining ways, namely:
- special based upon age of the inventor, and
- special based upon poor health of the inventor.
What might the practitioner charge for making a case special on either of these grounds?
Korean PCT search fee to drop on October 1
The fee for a US PCT filer to choose the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) as an International Searching Authority (ISA) is presently $1219. On October 1, 2015 it will drop to $1125. Continue reading “Korean PCT search fee to drop on October 1”
What it costs to get a US patent fast by Accelerated Examination?
Yesterday I blogged about what it might cost to get a US patent fast by means of Track I. Today I offer a few thoughts about what it might cost to get a US patent fast by means of AE (Accelerated Examination).
Continue reading “What it costs to get a US patent fast by Accelerated Examination?”
What it costs to get a US patent fast via Track I?
A long-standing member of the EFS-Web listserv (the listserv for US patent practitioners) wondered what to charge for a Track I request. (Track I is the program in which the US applicant can get his or her application moved to the front of the line for examination merely by paying a fee.) I figured I might as well post a series of blog pieces with a few thoughts about professional fees for the various programs by which an applicant can get a US patent fast.
Continue reading “What it costs to get a US patent fast via Track I?”