Category: Patents

Posted on

Cereal box got smaller but price stays the same (USPTO Director’s blog)

35 USC § 153 says:

Patents shall be issued in the name of the United States of America, under the seal of the Patent and Trademark Office, and shall be signed by the Director or have his signature placed thereon and shall be recorded in the Patent and Trademark Office.

For as long as I have been in practice, such patents have arrived in the postal mail approximately every Friday, following the Tuesday of issuance.  We call them “ribbon copies” because on the cover, they have a gold seal and they used to have a representation of a red ribbon.  I review the patents each week, often with some sense of satisfaction at having played some small part in the process of obtaining the patent from the USPTO on behalf of the client.  We then ship each patent to the client, with a cover letter solemnly advising the client that the patent should be kept safely “among the client’s important papers”.

It seems this will come to an end, according to a new article has been posted to the blog of the Director of the USPTO. Continue reading “Cereal box got smaller but price stays the same (USPTO Director’s blog)”

Posted on

Webinar recording now available: Picking an International Searching Authority

So you missed the CLE-accredited webinar about the Patent Cooperation Treaty that took place on Wednesday, December 8, 2021 entitled Picking an International Searching Authority?  Well, all is not lost.  You can download the program materials here and you can view the video recording here.  It is unlikely you will ever find anyplace that offers a comparable 86 minutes of discussion of this fascinating topic.  As a reminder this recording is provided free of charge, courtesy of the World Intellectual Property Organization.  You might be able to view it directly in your web browser here:

 

Here is a description:  Continue reading “Webinar recording now available: Picking an International Searching Authority”

Posted on

USPTO seems to be of two minds about PDF layers and it wastes everybody’s time

When Adobe started to create the Acrobat PDF standard in 1992, it began as a fairly simple standard.  As the years passed, the PDF standard grew and grew, so that all manner of weird and poorly understood things could be tucked away inside a PDF file.  By now in 2021, a PDF file might contain multimedia content.  It might have a hyperlink to launch a web browser or email client or a VOIP telephone calling client.  It might be “locked” with a password to prevent editing.  It might contain metadata indicating who created or edited the PDF, or the type of software that generated the PDF.  I used to joke that Adobe had a defined datatype for embedding scents in PDF files and then was astonished to learn that this had actually been proposed some years ago in some PDF working group.  I gather that scent embedding in PDFs did not actually get implemented.

In the world of USPTO patent e-filing, the chief way that the inner workings of the PDF standard become challenging is that the programmers at the USPTO profess to be unable to handle certain kinds of “fonts”.  (In a separate blog article I will elaborate on this “font” challenge which is a completely artificial challenge that exists only because the USPTO programmers cause it to exist.)

The other way that the inner workings of the PDF standard are challenging in the world of USPTO patent e-filing is that the programmers at the USPTO (along with their colleagues who draft policy documents and their colleagues who carry out day-to-day work) cannot quite make up their minds about whether “layers” in a PDF file are a problem or not.  And that is the focus of this blog article.  This lack of clarity in the minds of USPTO people leads to wasted time for people at the USPTO and wasted time for patent practitioners and applicants, as I will describe.

Continue reading “USPTO seems to be of two minds about PDF layers and it wastes everybody’s time”

Posted on

December 8 – an ideal PCT day!

Wednesday, December 8 will be an ideal day for enthusiasts for the Patent Cooperation Treaty.  Two action-packed events, one after another, both free of charge.

10:30 AM Eastern Time to 1PM Eastern Time.  WIPO’s annual Advanced PCT Seminar.  Topics include:

  • Recent and future developments in the PCT System
  • ePCT: latest and future developments

The prepared materials will conclude at noon Eastern Time, at which time a one-hour Q&A session will provide an opportunity for participants to ask PCT-related questions of WIPO’s panel of PCT experts.

Your presenters are Matthias Reischle-Park, Hanna Kang, Cécile Chatel, and Pascal Piriou.

For more information, or to register, click here.

2PM Eastern Time to 3:40 PM Eastern Time.  Picking an International Searching Authority.   A PCT filer from the US has eight International Searching Authorities to choose from:

  • Australian Patent Office (ISA/AU)
  • European Patent Office (ISA/EP)
  • Israel patent office (ISA/IL)
  • Japanese Patent Office (ISA/JP)
  • Korean Intellectual Property Office (ISA/KR)
  • Russian patent office (ISA/RU)
  • Singapore patent office (ISA/SG)
  • United States Patent and Trademark Office (ISA/US)

Is there some particular ISA among these eight ISAs that is always or nearly always the best choice for nearly all PCT filers?  (The answer is no!)

What are the advantages and disadvantages of these various International Searching Authorities?   What are aspects of a particular patent application that might make a big difference to an applicant in the applicant’s process of selecting an ISA?

As a bonus topic we will talk about ways that power users can use ePCT to communicate with ISAs, and we will talk about ways to transfer funds to ISAs.  We will also discuss the likely futility of trying to get the ISA to agree to let you hand in formal drawings after you have made the mistake of filing your PCT application with informal drawings.

Your presenter is Carl Oppedahl.

The event is free of charge, because of generous support from WIPO.  For more information, or to register, click here.

Posted on

Webinar recording now available: National phase or Bypass?

So you missed the CLE-accredited webinar about the Patent Cooperation Treaty that took place on Friday, November 19, 2021 entitled National Phase or Bypass Continuation?  Well, all is not lost.  You can download the program materials here and you can view the video recording here.  It is unlikely you will ever find anyplace that offers a comparable 88 minutes of discussion of this fascinating topic.  As a reminder this recording is provided free of charge, courtesy of the World Intellectual Property Organization.  You might be able to view it directly in your web browser here:

Here is a description.  Continue reading “Webinar recording now available: National phase or Bypass?”

Posted on

Webinar recording now available: Picking a Receiving Office

So you missed the CLE-accredited webinar about the Patent Cooperation Treaty that took place on Wednesday, November 17, 2021 entitled Picking a Receiving Office.  Well, all is not lost.  You can download the program materials here and you can view the video recording here.  It is unlikely you will ever find anyplace that offers a comparable 90 minutes of discussion of this fascinating topic.  As a reminder this recording is provided free of charge, courtesy of the World Intellectual Property Organization.   You might be able to view it directly in your web browser here:

Here is a description of the program. Continue reading “Webinar recording now available: Picking a Receiving Office”

Posted on

Four more upcoming webinars!

Okay folks.  Here are four more upcoming webinars for you.

The first three webinars, which all relate to the Patent Cooperation Treaty, are free of charge, thanks to the generous sponsorship of WIPO.

If you have not already done so, I suggest you share this page with all of your colleagues who handle PCT patent applications, so that they will have a chance to sign up for the PCT-related programs.

Who do you know that is scrambling around to try to pick up those last few ethics CLE credits before the end of the year?  Share this page with that person so that they can consider attending the December 10 legal ethics program on securing electronic communications.

Who do you know that is scrambling around to try to pick up a bunch of general CLE credits before the end of the year?  The price is right, especially for the first three programs.

If you don’t want to miss out on these and other webinars when they get scheduled, just subscribe to this blog.  

Posted on

Beware USPTO’s DOCX system

(Update:  it is time for you, dear reader, to consider signing another letter.  See blog posting.)

I have published several blog articles (see them here) warning practitioners about the problems with the USPTO’s ill-conceived plans for requiring patent applicants to submit their US patent applications in Microsoft Word format.

Every patent practitioner should attend a free-of-charge webinar that will be presented tomorrow by the Schwegman firm on this topic.

A look at how to file using DOCX documents in the USPTO Patent Center and how what you end up filing may not be what you intended to file. Or, just pay $400 more and submit a PDF of the application that the inventor approved.

To learn more or to register, click here.