Posts

Posted on

Eighty-two patent practitioners write to Director Vidal about the DOCX initiative

click to enlarge

Hello readers.  You will recall (blog article of December 27, 2022) that the practitioner community was invited to sign a letter to USPTO Director Vidal.  The letter urged her to read the document entitled The Fool’s Errand That Is DOCX, dated December 27, 2022, and the letter urged her to direct her underlings to read that document.

I am honored to be part of a community of eighty-two patent practitioners who signed that letter to Director Vidal.

This blog article reports that the letter did get sent to the USPTO.  You can see the letter, which is dated December 28, 2022, here.  The USPTO did receive the letter.

The next day, the USPTO blinked and postponed for another three months one of the really bad parts of its DOCX initiative.  See Setting and Adjusting Patent Fees During Fiscal Year 2020, 87 Federal Register 80073, published December 29, 2022.

There is reason to think that the USPTO is moving, albeit slowly, toward yet another bit of progress away from really bad parts of its DOCX initiative, in addition to that blink on December 29, 2022.  I hope to write another blog article soon about what might be another bit of progress.

Please take a look at the names of the eighty-two signers.  Maybe you know some of them.  If so, this might be a good time to say “thank you” to them.

Posted on

USPTO doubles down on demanding to know where you sleep at night

(Update:  the appellant’s reply brief has now been filed – blog article.)

Hello folks.  It will be recalled that the Commissioner for Trademarks has shown an extremely strong interest in knowing where you sleep at night, if you happen to be an applicant in a trademark application.  And in a brief filed yesterday at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Commissioner has now doubled down on demanding to know where you sleep at night.  Continue reading “USPTO doubles down on demanding to know where you sleep at night”

Posted on

How clamp-on DC ammeters work

click to enlarge

I imagine many readers of this blog have some idea how a clamp-on AC ammeter works.  You have some wire with AC current in it, and you open the jaws of a clamp-on meter and you close them around the wire.  The alternating current makes a constantly changing magnetic field around the wire.  It is a fairly realistic goal for the jaws to capture basically all of the lines of (constantly changing) magnetic flux surrounding the wire.  If you have the luxury of being able to assume that the frequency is known (and depending on the continent where you are located, this may well be a safe assumption), you can proceed in a very straightforward way to design a simple and inexpensive and quite accurate AC ammeter. I have had this Micronta (Radio Shack) meter (seen at right) in my tool kit for some fifty years now, and it has served me very well.

But nowadays there are clamp-on DC ammeters. A wire carrying a DC current does not (by definition it does not!) generate any changing magnetic field!  A traditional meter like the one described above has nothing to measure if it is clamped onto a wire containing a DC current.   How can a clamp-on DC ammeter possibly measure a (perhaps constant) DC current? Continue reading “How clamp-on DC ammeters work”

Posted on

Last day to get in your numbers for the 2022 toteboards!

Today is the last day to get in your numbers for the 2022 toteboards.  Click here to get in your numbers.

Here is what we have so far:

    • For the US utility patent toteboard — over fifty firms responding, representing over thirty thousand issued US utility patents.
    • For the US trademark registration toteboard — over fifty firms responding, representing over ten thousand granted US trademark registrations.
    • For the US design patent toteboard — over forty firms responding, representing over four thousand issued US design patents.
    • For the US plant patent toteboard — over three firms responding, representing over twenty-five US plant patents.

Get your numbers in.  The response forms will stop taking responses at the close of business today, Tuesday, January 24, 2023.

Posted on

USPTO harmed a Patentcenter screen

click to enlarge

For four years now, the “applications” table in Patentcenter has had a standard column “attorney docket number”.  There have been many things wrong with the USPTO’s default design of this “applications” table from the outset, as will be reviewed below.  But one of the handful of things that the USPTO did not get wrong in its default design for the “applications” table was that it provided the attorney docket number.  Imagine, then, the disappointment in the user community when, on January 16, 2023, the USPTO abruptly eliminated the “attorney docket number” column from the “applications” table.  Continue reading “USPTO harmed a Patentcenter screen”

Posted on

Not ready with complete details for your patent application? file a provisional!

I wonder if this language on the USPTO’s Patentcenter web site is bad legal advice?  The e-filing system asks “Not ready with complete details for your patent application?”  And the answer the USPTO gives is that if you are “not ready with complete details” then what you should file is a provisional patent application.  Continue reading “Not ready with complete details for your patent application? file a provisional!”