Why we never use “micro entity” status

We are all accustomed to “large entity” and “small entity” USPTO fees.  A small entity gets to pay half price for most USPTO fees, as compared with what a large entity would have to pay.

Micro entity status has been available since the AIA happened in about 2012. A micro entity gets to pay half price for most USPTO fees, as compared with what a small entity would have to pay.  That amounts to one-fourth of what a large entity would have to pay.

In the three or so years that have passed, our firm has never even once made use of “micro entity” status for a patent applicant in the USPTO.  Why? Continue reading “Why we never use “micro entity” status”

An entity can be both large and small

It is all too easy to get into a rut, (a) telling clients that the way to figure out whether an entity is large or small is by counting the employees and (b) proceeding on the assumption that if a client was small in its previous patent application, then of course the client will likewise be small in its next patent application.

But an entity can be simultaneously large and small.

Continue reading “An entity can be both large and small”

A feature USPTO needs to add – permalinks

In Patentscope and ePCT, WIPO offers “permalinks”.  These are web links that you can copy and use elsewhere, such as intranets and emails to clients.   permalinkSimilarly in European Patent Register, EPO offers such web links.register

 

Indeed the TSDR system of USPTO offers URLs that can be used this way.  So why doesn’t USPTO offer such links?

Alert list member Henry Blanco White points out that USPTO provides complicated instructions for constructing links to particular records in the USPTO Patent Full-Text and Image Database.  It’s not simply a link that you can right-click on and save.  But it is apparently a way to construct a link.

USPTO needs to offer such links in Public PAIR and in Private PAIR.  USPTO also needs to offer such links in the Patent Application Full Text and Image Database.

(Updated June 23 to reflect that USPTO does offer constructable links in the USPTO Patent Full-Text and Image Database.)

Do your own patent application customer number changes!

Recently I blogged about three nice new Private PAIR features — USPTO nice again — this time letting you check customer numbers and Now you can update entity size yourself! and Get your own new USPTO customer numbers.  Here is a fourth nice new Private PAIR feature.  You can update the customer number associated with a patent application or patent yourself. Continue reading “Do your own patent application customer number changes!”

How to correct a check-the-box mistake?

We are familiar with the “check-the-box” problem.  The AIA provides that for a “transition” application, the law to be applied to determine what is patentable and what is not patentable is based on whether the application contains, or ever contained, at least one claim the effective filing date of which is on or after March 16, 2013.  (A “transition” application is an application filed on or after March 16, 2013 that claims domestic benefit or foreign priority from an application filed prior to March 16, 2013.)  The AIA did not say who exactly is supposed to figure out whether such a claim exists or existed.  Unfortunately for applicants, in the February 14, 2013 Final Rules the USPTO successfully shifted this claim analysis burden to the applicant (more accurately, to the patent practitioner).  check It falls to the practitioner to work out whether or not this box should be checked.  And years later in litigation of such a transition application, it will often happen that an accused infringer will devote enormous amounts of time and energy exploring whether a case can be made the the practitioner made a check-the-box mistake — checking the box when it should not have been checked, or failing to check the box when it should have been checked.

Which gets us to the topic of this blog posting.  What if, during the pendency of a transition application, the practitioner discovers to his or her horror that a check-the-box mistake was made?  Can the mistake be corrected?  If so, how? Continue reading “How to correct a check-the-box mistake?”