On Wednesday, October 2, 2019 Samoa deposited its Instrument of Accession to the Hague Agreement.
The Agreement will enter into force in Samoa on Thursday, January 2, 2020.
This brings to 72 the number of contracting parties to the Hague Agreement.
As of January 2, 2020, companies and designers from Samoa can begin using the Hague System to protect their industrial designs. The applicant can pursue protection in many countries through a single international application and a single set of fees.
Likewise from January 2, 2020, those located outside of Samoa will be able to seek design protection in Samoa through the Hague System.
Samoa will join the Patent Cooperation Treaty on January 2, 2020 and joined the Madrid Protocol on March 4, 2019. Samoa will thus complete the trifecta of membership in all three international intellectual property filing platforms.
On Thursday, October 3, 2019 Israel deposited its Instrument of Accession to the Hague Agreement.
The Agreement will enter into force in Israel on Friday, January 3, 2020.
I blogged back on October 21, 2017 that Israel was going to join Hague Real Soon Now, and finally it has happened.
This brings to 73 the number of contracting parties to the Hague Agreement.
As of January 3, 2020, companies and designers from Israel can begin using the Hague System to protect their industrial designs. The applicant can pursue protection in many countries through a single international application and a single set of fees.
Likewise from January 3, 2020, those located outside of Israel will be able to seek design protection in Israel through the Hague System.
Israel joined the Patent Cooperation Treaty on June 1, 1996 and joined the Madrid Protocol on September 1, 2010. Israel has thus completed the trifecta of membership in all three international intellectual property filing platforms.
Every now and then we receive a notice like this after paying an Issue Fee. It is a Notice to File Corrected Application Papers (“NTFCAP”), and it tells us that our case will go abandoned if we fail to hand in a Substitute Specification, identical to what is already in the file except that it has to have page numbers added. Continue reading “Wasted energy at USPTO regarding page numbering”
USPTO says that if you check this box, the second authentication factor will not be not needed during signin for the next 24 hours.
This is, of course, false. Or more accurately, it is almost always false. The check box does occasionally save the USPTO customer from having to carry out two-factor authentication when logging in to a USPTO system. But usually it does not work. Continue reading “Does this check box ever actually work?”
There is a very helpful listserv (email discussion group) for US patent practitioners. it is called the EFS-Web listserv, originally created to help US practitioners survive the problems in the initial launch by the USPTO of the EFS-Web system. The charter of the listserv has now broadened to encompass US patent prosecution practice generally. Here’s a question that one loyal listserv member posted today:
I just had a case transferred in that was filed with a PPH request in the US, based on a PCT written opinion. I haven’t used PPH before, so don’t have much experience.
There is a pending office action, in which the Examiner found some art in the US that wasn’t in the original search report, and I think our best way forward is to amend the claims.
PPH requests appear to require that all claim amendments be within the scope of the claims held allowable in the PCT application.
What’s the procedure if I am going to add a claim limitation that’s not in the original claim set?
There’s a fellow who years ago filed a trademark application for “listserv”. It registered, and by now he has filed three renewals including an incontestability statement. You can see the TSDR record here. The term has long since become generic.
The registrant’s web site uses the term as a noun, as you can see in this screen shot.
My firm sponsors many listservs, some of which are listed here.
Starting today, a trademark owner in Brazil can file a Madrid Protocol application to pursue protection in one or more Offices outside of Brazil.
And starting from today, a trademark owner outside of Brazil can file a new Madrid Protocol application designating Brazil.
I had previously posted that starting from today, a trademark owner outside of Brazil who already has an International Registration can file a Subsequent Designation to Brazil. This is stated too broadly. Brazil’s Instrument of Accession includes an Article 14(5) Declaration, which provides that a “sub des” can only be filed with respect to Brazil for an IR that was registered on or after today, that is, on or after October 2, 2019.
Right on schedule, the National Institute of Industrial Property of Argentina (“INPI-AR”) has indeed today joined the DAS system. INPI-AR is now operating as an Accessing Office in DAS with respect to patents and utility models and industrial designs. Here is an excerpt from an exemplary Certificate of Availability from DAS showing availability of a design application:
About forty-six comments have been filed in response to USPTO’s recent notice of proposed rulemaking regarding patent fees. One of the comments is filed by “Seventy-three patent practitioners”. Here is the opening paragraph of their letter:
We write as patent practitioners to comment on a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM), Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees During Fiscal Year 2020. The signatories are members of several email listserv groups, a community of patent practitioners. The signatories taken together filed about 20,000 patent applications at the PTO during the past ten years, and paid about $50 million in fees to the PTO in the past ten years.
I am honored to be among the signers of that letter.
On a quick skim, it appears that every comment to this NPRM (including the comment cited above) that touches in any way on the non-DOCX surcharge is critical of USPTO’s effort to try to force applicants to file patent applications in DOCX format through imposition of a $400 penalty for failure to do so.
In future blog articles I will try to excerpt and summarize some of the views expressed in the comments.
Yet another intellectual property office has joined DAS for industrial designs. IP Australia will become both an Accessing Office and a Depositing Office for designs on November 1, 2019.
This brings to nine the number of Depositing Offices for designs. This brings to eight the number of Accessing Offices for designs. The Accessing Offices for designs are:
