eCommerce Modernization Project

This eMod IdeaScale is designed to be a forum for public suggestions and discussions to drive the improvements to the electronic patent application process. The eCommerce Modernization (eMod) Project will modernize USPTO’s application filing and viewing systems to better fit your needs.

You can contribute by sharing ideas, discussing through the comments sections, or voting on ideas. We regularly check through the ideas and comments, share them with the team, and will even post a few ideas of our own! Although we will not respond to every idea, all ideas will be reviewed and considered. eMod IdeaScale FAQs

More information about the project can be found at http://www.uspto.gov/patent/emod. If you have any questions for the eMod Team, please contact us at emod@uspto.gov.

We look forward to hearing your feedback!

Modernization of PAIR

Submitted by (@dphipps)

Remove POA Requirement to Change Fee Address

This is related to "Recognize POA in Issued Patent to Allow for Withdrawal." A practitioner will periodically need to update the Fee Address where the practitioner does not have Power of Attorney (POA). If a practitioner has access to the record via the Correspondence Address, the Office should allow such practitioner to update the Fee Address. Please correct me if I am wrong ... It does not appear that POA is required ...more »

Voting

1 vote
1 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Modernization of EFS-Web

Submitted by (@judiths)

Allow Saving of Upload at Every Screen

I had previously suggested that the system automatically save uploaded documents, if it logs someone out. An alternative that may be easier to implement would be to provide a "save this submission" option on the document upload page as well. That way we can save the upload in process. This would be especially useful for example after we upload all the documents and before we start the document verification (opening ...more »

Voting

6 votes
6 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Miscellaneous

Submitted by (@judiths)

Allow Setting up Patent Docket on My.USPTO.gov with Customer #

The Trademark Docket allows search by Attorney but the Patent Docket requires a listing of each application number for monitoring.

 

It would be very useful to be able to add to your Patent Docket by Customer Number. It is also logical, since you are logged into My.USPTO.gov and thus it is easy to provide the Customer Numbers associated with your log-in.

Voting

4 votes
4 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Miscellaneous

Submitted by (@dphipps)

Eliminate Petition for Technical Corrections to Priority Claims

While the US and other countries are moving toward transmission of these documents electronically, it would be nice to allow applicants to correct formalities in their priority claim that have been preventing the electronic retrieval of priority documents. Since there is a waiver in the rules for when the priority document must be supplied when it is available electronically, the Office should allow applicants to fix ...more »

Voting

5 votes
5 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Modernization of EFS-Web

Submitted by (@judiths)

Organize Document Descriptions Logically and make the Searchable

When classifying a document that is uploaded, we have to select a Document Description. But document descriptions are not in any logical order. For example, for an Office Action response, there are six categories, three of which start with different words, and thus are in different parts of the pull-down menu. (Amendment, Preliminary, and Response) Since all of these are amendments, they should be categorized together. ...more »

Voting

14 votes
14 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Modernization of EFS-Web

Submitted by (@judiths)

FIX Web-ADS Priority Data Problem

Web-ADS appears to be BROKEN. If you use it to update anything for a matter with priority claims, it will edit the priority claim, and change the ordering of the elements. This is true even if you do not change the priority data at all. It will also insert an issue date for a Pending application. This is a serious problem and means that despite its convenience we cannot use the Web-ADS for to update the ADS data. ...more »

Voting

8 votes
8 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Miscellaneous

Submitted by

Change 37 CFR 1.55(f) Requirement for Certified Copy

The rules specify at 37 CFR 1.55(f) the deadlines for filing a certified copy of the priority document. Failure to file a certified copy results in loss of priority benefits. Related rules specify requirements for a Petition to accept late filing of a certified copy of the priority document. There is no statutory requirement for a certified copy of the priority document. This is 2019!! Nobody, including patent examiners, ...more »

Voting

6 votes
6 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Modernization of EFS-Web

Submitted by

Permit e-filing of Petitions to Revive after Final Rejection

A Petition to Revive can be e-filed by completing a form online and receiving an instantaneous grant if all formal conditions are met. One exception to this type of filing is if a Response has been filed under 37 CFR 1.116 after a final rejection. The system requires regular filing of the petition after a final rejection. Why? This makes no sense. It requires more effort on the part of the PTO to have a Petitions ...more »

Voting

5 votes
5 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Modernization of EFS-Web

Submitted by (@judiths)

Provide an Alert if there is something wrong/EFS is not working

It appears that EFS stops working periodically, with little warning. It would be really useful if there were a "live" status update on EFS when we log into EFS. For example, today I uploaded a patent application. It was validated, and everything looked like it was going well, until I clicked Submit. At that point I got a notice that said: "Your request could not be completed at this time. Please try again later." ...more »

Voting

8 votes
8 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Security and Authentication

Submitted by (@morell)

Enable checkboxes for sponsorship renewal

Currently when removing sponsorship you need to click an "x" next to each name and also click an additional box to confirm removal. In situations where we're removing multiple people it is burdensome to click two times per each name. Please add a "select all" function and/or enable multiple people to be selected at one time.

Voting

8 votes
8 up votes
0 down votes
Active