Back in the “ReThink(IP)” days, we had a frequent meme called “Things we hate about uspto.gov.” Sadly, most of those “things” are still issues.

I thought it might be fun to revisit that list (and expand on it) via a series of posts here that I will tag with “uspto” and “feedback”. Perhaps the new, friendlier USPTO will fix some of them. We can only hope.

—————-

Issue:  TESS times out on a user if the user stops using it for a very short period of time. While that, itself, is quite annoying (I can’t think of any other website I use that tells me that my session has “timed out”), the REAL annoying part is that the time out page doesn’t return you to the TESS search page. Instead, it dumps you back to the USPTO home page, requiring the user to navigate back to the TESS search page.

Solution: Return the user to the TESS landing page so they can continue searching.

 

I downloaded an Office Action via TDR earlier today, saved it to my server, and went to email it to a client.  Only then did I realize the Action (60 pages long with 55+ pages of color website printouts) was 22MB in size.  Ouch.

In that many email servers bounce any attachments bigger than 5MB, I needed to figure out how to convert the file to grayscale.  Luckily, I found instructions (see: Tips & Techniques: Convert a color PDF to grayscale in Acrobat 9).

In a nutshell,

  1. Open the PDF in Acrobat 9 Pro.
  2. Select “Advanced,” then “Print Production,” then “Preflight.”
  3. Select the “PDF fixups dropdown.”
  4. Select “Convert to grayscale,” then the “Analyze and fix” button.

Voila!

Ok…so it didn’t totally fix my issue this time, it only dropped the file size from 22MB to 11MB…but it is a start.  I’m sure I’ll figure out a few more tricks as I experiment over time…and I’ll try to share what I find in future posts.

 

In a previous post, I asked:

The USPTO PatFT page for Patent Number Search lists three examples for reexamination patent numbering:

Re-examination — RX29,194 RE29183 RE00125

However, if you type in those three “example” numbers into the search box, you get a “PN/RX29,194: 0 patents” error and two reissue patents.  It is odd that the USPTO examples aren’t valid…

Anyone know of a valid re-examination number (for a project I’m working on)?

Mike Brown, in a comment, noted that “I was recently working on a re-examination, and needed to find examples. The easiest way is to search by serial number – use the “90? series for ex-parte re-examinations, and “95? series for inter-partes. For example:  APN/90005727 is an ex-parte case, APN/95000050 is an inter-partes.”

However, it still didn’t answer the exact question I had.  So, for my project…I dug deeper.

Once a reexamination has been concluded, the Patent Office issues a “Certificate of Reexamination” that denotes how the issued patent was corrected by the reexamination.  That “Certificate of Reexam.” is then attached to the original patent’s images (but not full text) on the USPTO site.  Example:  USPN 5,108,388.

Frustratingly, I still ask two questions:

1.  Why does the PatFT give examples for reexaminations that are either null (RX29,194) or are for reissues (RE29183, RE00125)?

2.  What is a valid reissue [reexamination] number (for use on PatFT or even PAIR)?  Is the PatFT page in error for listing examples?  Is there another way to search?

Some example reexamination numbers…in case one of you can figure it out (from the “U.S. Patent Number Guide” generated by Michael White):

  • Ex Parte Reexamination #1 relates to USPN 4,104,156
  • Ex Parte Reexamination #7864 relates to USPN 5,343,123
  • Inter Parte Reexamination #1 relates to USPN 6,232,427
  • Inter Parte Reexamination #118 relates to USPN 6,696,316

Perhaps I should just ask Mr. White…

Update.  Mr. White replied to me, noting that:

I have no idea what these so-called “example” re-examination numbers are. They are definitely not reexamination numbers. As far as I know, there is no way to search reexamination application serial numbers in PatFT. Reexamination certificates are not OCRed or indexed. (A standing complaint among professional patent searchers.) Their numbers are not searchable in the APN field. You can only retrieve them by retrieving the patent document to which they’re attached. Obviously, the person who put together these “helpful” examples was not familiar with PTO documents or data. (Probably a contractor.)

However, rexam serial numbers are searchable in Public/Private PAIR using the format “90nnnnnn” for ex parte and “95nnnnnn” for inter partes. There appear to be PAIR records for ex partes back to the mid 1980s but file wrapper documents are only available from ~2003 forward.

Dec 172008
 

Some trademark sites I bookmarked via Delicious.com that my readers may find of note:

 

The USPTO PatFT page for Patent Number Search lists three examples for reexamination patent numbering:

Re-examination — RX29,194 RE29183 RE00125

However, if you type in those three “example” numbers into the search box, you get a “PN/RX29,194: 0 patents” error and two reissue patents.  It is odd that the USPTO examples aren’t valid…

Anyone know of a valid re-examination number (for a project I’m working on)?

 

We all know that allowance rates are down, way down.

Matt Buchanan, after analyzing weekly USPTO utility patent grants, states that decreasing allowance rates:

…will have both an immediate and a delayed impact on Office income – Twenty thousand fewer issues fees have been paid so far this year as compared to 2006. If all of those ‘lost patents’ would have been large entity patents (which, of course, is not the case), the lost issue fees would be more that $28 million dollars ($14M if all would have been granted to small entities). That’s real money, even in Washington.

The impact will be felt again in 3 to 4 years when the first maintenance fees are due on this year’s crop (assuming similar maintenance rates). Maximum lost revenue here is greater than $18M (if all of the lost patents would have been maintained by large entities). This will ripple through the maintenance fee schedule as time marches on (fees will be due again in 7-8 years, and again in 11-2 years). If maintenance rates remain the same, proportionate reductions in income can be expected.

Can you say shortfall? Huge shortfall. Tens (if not hundreds) of millions of dollars of lost USPTO revenue.

How exactly are they going to make up the difference? Increase fees? Decrease services? Have patent applicants do more of the examination themselves? Lay off Examiners? Sublease space? Additional funding from Congress? Pressure from Congress to increase allowance rates?

Scary things to ponder….

Feb 052008
 

According to this post, the current USPTO allowance rate is around 44%.  Ouch.

 

One additional benefit/drawback of the Image File Wrapper system (which allows the public access to the file wrappers of pending patent applications) is §102(e) rejections based on published provisional patent applications.  Of course, for there to be a “published provisional patent application” a non-provisional patent application must have been filed claiming priority from the provisional…

Which brings me to today’s USPTO Notice:  Most Publicly Available Provisional Applications Can Now be Viewed Over the Internet

Any applicant wishing to view and/or print a copy of a provisional application relied upon by an examiner to give prior art effect under 35 U.S.C. 102(e) to a reference applied in a rejection, may do so using the Public PAIR website at http://portal.uspto.gov/external/portal/pair.

© 2012 The Invent Blog Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha