Bluesky: @oppedahl.com Mastodon.social: @ant-like
There are quite a few upcoming opportunities to learn about the Patent Cooperation Treaty:
Continue reading “Opportunities to learn about the Patent Cooperation Treaty”
Here are some firms that were ranked in last year’s Utility Patent Tote Board, but which have not yet responded for this year’s Utility Patent Tote Board.
If you know somebody at one of these firms, you might want to pass this along to them. The response date has been extended from January 20, 2017 to January 23, 2017. To respond, click here.
| Andrus Intellectual Property Law, LLP |
| Antoinette M. Tease, P.L.L.C. |
| Armstrong Teasdale |
| Baker Botts |
| Banner & Witcoff |
| Blakely Sokoloff |
| Brinks Gilson |
| Brownstein Hyatt |
| Bryan Cave |
| Buchanan Ingersoll |
| Christie Parker |
| Cochran Freund |
| Conley Rose |
| Crossley Patent Law |
| Dorsey & Whitney |
| Drinker Biddle |
| Duft Bornsen |
| Faegre Baker Daniels |
| Fenwick & West |
| Finnegan Henderson |
| Fish & Richardson |
| Fitzpatrick Cella |
| Foley & Lardner |
| Greenberg Traurig |
| Hamilton DeSanctis |
| Hartman Patents PLLC |
| Hauptman Ham, LLP |
| Head, Johnson & Kachigian, PC |
| HIPLegal LLP |
| Hoffman Warnick LLC |
| Hogan Lovells |
| Holland & Hart |
| HolzerIPLaw |
| IP&L Solutions |
| Juneau & Mitchell |
| K&L Gates |
| Kain Spielman |
| Katten Muchin Rosenman |
| Kenyon & Kenyon |
| Kilpatrick Townsend |
| Klaas Law O’Meara |
| Knobbe Martens |
| Ladas & Parry |
| Larson & Anderson |
| Lathrop & Gage |
| Law Office of Robert Rose |
| Leason Ellis |
| Lemaire Patent Law Firm |
| Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd. |
| Macheledt Bales LLP |
| Marsh Fischmann & Breyfogle LLP |
| McDermott Will |
| Merchant & Gould |
| Morgan Lewis |
| Morrison & Foerster |
| Muncy, Geissler, Olds & Lowe, P.C. |
| Neugeboren O’Dowd PC |
| Nixon Peabody |
| Nixon Vanderhye |
| Norred Law, PLLC |
| Novak Druce |
| Oblon McClelland |
| Ollila Law Group |
| Patentfile, LLC |
| Patterson Thuente |
| Patwrite Law |
| Pepper Hamilton |
| Perkins Coie |
| Pillsbury Winthrop |
| Polsinelli PC |
| Polson Intellectual Property Law |
| Pritzkau Patent Group, LLP |
| Pryor Cashman |
| RatnerPrestia |
| Reed Smith |
| Robinson Intellectual Property Law Office |
| Rossi, Kimms & McDowell LLP |
| Santangelo Law Offices |
| Schwegman Lundberg |
| Scully Scott |
| Setter Roche |
| Sheridan Ross |
| Stass & Halsey |
| Steptoe & Johnson |
| Sterne Kessler |
| Sughrue Mion |
| Swanson & Bratschun |
| Vedder Price |
| Wenderoth |
| Westerman, Hattori, Daniels & Adrian, LLP |
| Winston & Strawn LLP |
| Wolf Greenfield |
| Workman Nydegger |
In the EFS-Web listserv, alert listserv member Michele Cimbala points out that tomorrow will be a federal holiday in the District of Columbia for purposes of filings at the USPTO.
You can see this on the USPTO web site.
Anything that was due to be filed tomorrow, January 20, 2017 will be timely if filed the following Monday, January 23, 2017.
What goes up must come down, it seems.
| USD search fee as of December 31, 2016 | As of January 1, 2017 | % increase | March 1, 2017 | % decrease | |
| ISA/EP | $2097 | $2103 | 0.3% | $1992 | 5.3% |
| ISA/KR | $1120 | $1177 | 5.1% | $1114 | 5.4% |
| ISA/JP | $1530 | $1536 | 0.4% | $1372 | 10.7% |
Continue reading “Some PCT search fees to drop on March 1, 2017”
Ever since March 16, 2013 there has been a profound asymmetry in the manner in which check-the-box mistakes could be corrected by the practitioner. For more than three years now, it has been easy (according to USPTO’s rules) to correct a mistake if it happens in one direction, and impossible to correct the mistake if it happens in the opposite direction. USPTO has now announced a policy that is intended to reduce this profound asymmetry. Continue reading “USPTO addresses asymmetry in the correction of check-the-box mistakes”
A year ago I published the 2015 Utility Patent Toteboard. Now it’s time to finalize and publish the 2016 Utility Patent Toteboard.
The goal of this toteboard is to list the firms that helped clients to obtain US utility patents in 2016. It will rank the firms according to the number of US utility patents obtained. Respondents are asked to report only US utility patents for which the firm is listed on the front page of the granted patent. Please respond by January 20, 2017.
To respond, click here.
As a reminder, many PCT searching authorities will have fee changes taking effect today. You can read about them in my blog posting from a month ago.
Now and again we will receive instructions from a client (or foreign patent firm) to incur no further expense in a particular patent application. In such a patent application, what sometimes happens later is that we receive an Office Action. This prompted me to share a few thoughts about whether the applicant should file an Express Abandonment in such a case.
Continue reading “Why aren’t there more express abandonments?”
The Post-Prosecution Pilot program at the USPTO (“P3”) is almost gone. Continue reading “P3 is almost gone”
A year ago I reported that USPTO’s then-new system for paying patent issues fees was a disappointment. That then-new system was a web-based system in which the practitioner could provide issue information in character form. The hope of course is that USPTO would auto-load the issue information into USPTO’s systems. For example if the practitoner correctly typed the assignee name into the web-based system, then the hope is that the assignee name would be correctly spelled on the front page of the issued patent. And similarly if the “attorney, agent or firm” information were correctly typed into the web-based system, then the hope is that the “attorney, agent or firm” information would be correctly spelled on the front page of the issued patent.
And as of a year ago, the disappointing news was that the USPTO was hand-keying this issue information into USPTO’s systems. The result at that time for our office was a discouraging 20% error rate.
I had hoped that in the year that has passed since USPTO’s release of this web-based system for paying patent issue fees, USPTO would finally have gotten around to setting it up so that the issue information would auto-load into USPTO’s systems. Continue reading “After more than a year, USPTO still hand-keying patent issue information”