Miscellaneous

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

8 votes
8 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@cparnell)

Miscellaneous

IDS Reference Date

The SB 08 A to be submitted to the PTO requested that the full month day and year be referenced next to each reference submitted. However when receiving references in an OA from the examiner, only the month and year are referenced. Very time consuming to have to look up each of those references just to find the day of the date to submit the SB 08 A.

Voting

38 votes
38 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@alanflum)

Patent Center Beta Release

Include a Tab or Dropdown to Set Preferences

It would be very helpful to be able to set preferences for viewing and other tasks both in Workbench and other modules of Patent Center and have these saved with our profiles so they are remembered each time we log in. For example, for Workbench it would be great to be able to set the following preferences: number of items per page (instead of always defaulting to ten), the order they are presented (i.e., which column... more »

Voting

2 votes
2 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@dphipps)

Miscellaneous

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

7 votes
7 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@judiths)

Miscellaneous

Customer Number Controls -- Addition/Deletion Notifications

It has recently come to our attention that there is at least one customer number out there to which attorneys have been added that are not actually affiliated with the entity that added them to the customer number. For those of us affiliated with multiple customer numbers, this is disturbing. If we accidentally associate an application with this "Phishing Customer number" others could get access to customer-confidential... more »

Voting

9 votes
9 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@alanflum)

Miscellaneous

Pre-exam policies and procedures should be public

Most of the internal pre-examination procedures are opaque outside of the USPTO. It would be very help to have, in writing, on the USPTO website the exact internal procedures used to evaluate whether a Power of Attorney form, drawings, application data sheet, etc. are compliant. This would help reduce errors and ultimately reduce USPTO staff work load.

Voting

15 votes
15 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@dphipps)

Patent Center Beta Release

Inventor Name Display Consistency

Please ensure consistency in the way inventor names are displayed. In several records some inventor names are displayed as First Middle Last while others are listed as Last, First Middle.

 

The variation can cause inadvertent errors that cost the applicant to fix.

Voting

6 votes
6 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@dphipps)

Miscellaneous

Opt-Out for Original Patent Grant

Allow applicants to opt-out of receiving an original patent grant as many do not wish to store the original documents. Although they are nicely presented, entities with large portfolios find little value in the original ribbon document. Allowing those who do not wish to receive an original is a cost and environment saver. Law firms won't be asked to store thousands of original patent grants, or need to mail these documents... more »

Voting

6 votes
7 up votes
1 down votes
Active
(@todd00)

Miscellaneous

Update firm address by customer number in trademark applications

Currently, if a firm changes their mailing address, the changes to trademark applications and registrations must be updated one at a time. In a large portfolio of hundreds of applications and registrations, this is time consuming. It would be great if we could update firm addresses in trademark applications in bulk, e.g. by customer number or single spreadsheet.

Voting

3 votes
3 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@stanprotigal)

Miscellaneous

Match paragraph numbers in published appln to as-filed spec

It would be convenient for citation purposes if the paragraph numbers in the published application match those in the specification as-filed. My suggestion is that, so long as the numbering in the as-filed specification meets the USPTO publication guidelines, the original paragraph numbering should be retained in the published specification. The reason is that, while specification amendments are made to the as-filed... more »

Voting

7 votes
8 up votes
1 down votes
Active
(@mpaik0)

Miscellaneous

Official Filing Receipt

Please include all pertinent applicant/application information on the first page of the official Filing Receipt, such as the title of the application and the entity status. Often this information is on second page, which I find a nuisance.

Voting

7 votes
7 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@judiths)

Miscellaneous

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

8 votes
8 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@dphipps)

Miscellaneous

Patent Holder Information

When accessing maintenance fee information, the Patent Holder Information is actually the information for the Fee Address. While I understand much of the public may not identify with "Fee Address," labeling this as the "Patent Holder" isn't appropriate either. I would like to suggest a revision to something similar to Fee Payer Information. This way if the information is for a law firm or annuity provider, it will... more »

Voting

6 votes
6 up votes
0 down votes
Active
(@stanprotigal)

Leveraging Text (DOCX)

"This document contains multiple application parts" errors

In a trial ".docx" filing of a pair of patent applications, we received several instances of the above "This document contains multiple application parts" error, flagged as a fatal error, all for the Specification part. (The Claims and Abstract sections were apparently acceptable.) Needless to say, we eventually filed both of these .pdf. None of these errors indicated what specifically triggered this error, so what... more »

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active

Patent Center Beta Release

PatentCenter can't accept an issue fee in a reissue application

I just tried to make an issue fee payment in a reissue application, but the list of document descriptions available is context sensitive and apparently in a reissue application, the "Issue Fee Payment" description is not available. I scrolled through everything and it was not there. I thought there might be an alternative description specific to reissue, but that was not there either.

Voting

0 votes
0 up votes
0 down votes
Active