Patents – Page 96 – Ant-Like Persistence

September 11, 2015

Unexpectedly fast PCT-PPH decisions at USPTO

Note: what seemed like an improvement at the USPTO regarding PPH petitions turned out to be illusory. Please see a followup article about this.

There are two ways to pursue US patent protection from a PCT patent application:

entry into the US national phase, and
filing of a bypass continuation application,

and there are many factors which might influence a particular filer’s choice of one approach or the other. Now there is yet another factor, namely the speed with which a PPH petition might get granted. If you pick “US national phase”, your PPH petition will nowadays likely get decided in a few days rather than a few months. As I will describe below, a couple of weeks ago we filed about fifty PCT-PPH petitions, and we figured we would have to wait the usual four to seven months for USPTO to decide them. We were astonished when seven of these fifty PCT-PPH petitions got decided in less than three weeks. It turns out there is an easy explanation for this happy result. Continue reading “Unexpectedly fast PCT-PPH decisions at USPTO”

September 11, 2015

Dealing with the ways that USPTO mangles images

When you e-file an image in a USPTO e-filing system, what often happens is that the USPTO mangles the image. I will describe some of the things that can go wrong and will give a few tips on minimizing the extent of the mangling. Continue reading “Dealing with the ways that USPTO mangles images”

August 29, 2015

Looking back over twenty years of service

Oppedahl Patent Law Firm LLC, and its predecessor firms, has been serving clients now for over twenty-two years. This got me thinking of some of the firm’s milestones over the years. Here are some of the high points:

Continue reading “Looking back over twenty years of service”

August 29, 2015

Avoiding having to translate two documents into English

A question came in from a good friend:

A client from a non-US country wants to enter the United States at the end of the PCT which was filed in a non-English language. He is working on a CIP but won’t have it ready until another few months. He would like to try and avoid the cost of a double translation. Can you think of a way for him to enter into the US at the end of the 30 months with the non-English language version, and somehow avoid having to translate that application, and then in a few months when he has the CIP ready here he will file that in the US and translate that one into English. My concern is that without filing an English translation of the first application, is he able to get somehow a valid US filing date?

Here’s what I think the answer is. Continue reading “Avoiding having to translate two documents into English”

August 29, 2015

Whither USPTO’s Form PTO-1382?

A longstanding member of the PCT listserv asked:

It used to be that for a PCT, along with Request RO101, we would file a transmittal form for USPTO: PTO-1382 (Rev. 04-2010). Yet none of my readings about ePCT or your blog mentions that. Has it gone away? Continue reading “Whither USPTO’s Form PTO-1382?”

August 23, 2015

Speaking in Toronto, Cincinnati, Cleveland and Washington in October

October is a busy travel month for me. Here are some of my upcoming speaking engagements: Continue reading “Speaking in Toronto, Cincinnati, Cleveland and Washington in October”

August 23, 2015

USPTO can’t say it wasn’t warned about its Java applet problem

It is astonishing that even now, in August of 2015, despite many warnings and requests from users over the span of several years, USPTO has not scrapped its Java applet. By this I mean the Entrust Java applet which USPTO forces customers to use to authenticate their logins at Private PAIR and EFS-Web. The most recent reminder of all of this is USPTO’s oddly worded “Third Notice”, an email alert on August 18, 2015 from the USPTO warning customers that time is running out for users of Chrome browsers. In September of 2015 (that is, during the next month) Chrome will stop supporting Java, meaning that users of Chrome will no longer be able to log in at Private PAIR or EFS-Web.

Until now I had sort of thought of Chrome as a relative newcomer among web browsers, and I had sort of assumed that most people still use Firefox and Microsoft Internet Exploder. Which got me wondering, how many USPTO customers use Chrome anyway? Continue reading “USPTO can’t say it wasn’t warned about its Java applet problem”

August 21, 2015

No outgoing correspondence from USPTO this week?

Over on the patent practitioner’s listserv, alert listserv member Judith Szepesi asked:

I usually get 1-2 things via eOffice Action every day. I haven’t gotten any emails in the last week. Not a single one. Logging in, the last item on PAIR Outgoing Correspondence has a mail room date of August 11, 2015. I don’t think I have had a break this long since I set up the eOffice Action emails. Is it just me?

Continue reading “No outgoing correspondence from USPTO this week?”

August 18, 2015

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?”

August 17, 2015

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?”