Director's Blog: the latest from USPTO leadership (Comments)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/feed/comments/atom
2024-03-12T16:23:36-04:00
Apache Roller
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ai-and-inventorship-guidance-incentivizing#comment-1708043945924
Re: AI and inventorship guidance: Incentivizing human ingenuity and investment in AI-assisted inventions
Paul T Sugden
2024-02-15T19:39:05-05:00
2024-02-15T19:39:05-05:00
AI is conceptually an advanced computer program that patenting has dealt with since computing became a way of life. The essence of patenting has focused (I think correctly) on human intervention to create something in the industrial arts, that is a Method or product of a method. These concepts can still cater to this new form, by staying true to the focus of human intervention, being assisted by AI. The issue is always about a degree.
In the copyright sphere, for example, using two words "abstract cat" an AI drawing program to produce multitudes of abstract cats in various artistic genres. Is using two words of instruction enough to be the author of a picture of an abstract cat to have copyright in the resulting picture?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ai-and-inventorship-guidance-incentivizing#comment-1708021798780
Re: AI and inventorship guidance: Incentivizing human ingenuity and investment in AI-assisted inventions
Cecilia Ziniti
2024-02-15T13:29:58-05:00
2024-02-15T13:29:58-05:00
Thank you, Director Vidal and team - these guidelines are helpful and clear and do a good job of appreciating the reality that working alongside AI will increase innovation. I especially liked the hypotheticals you put together and the answers. Kudos.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ai-and-inventorship-guidance-incentivizing#comment-1707981173514
Re: AI and inventorship guidance: Incentivizing human ingenuity and investment in AI-assisted inventions
Arushi mehra
2024-02-15T02:12:53-05:00
2024-02-15T02:12:53-05:00
Overall, this initiative represents a significant step forward in navigating the evolving intersection of AI and intellectual property rights. I'm eager to see how these guidelines will shape the future of innovation and IP protection in the digital age.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1700578719892
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
OCCO
2023-11-21T09:58:39-05:00
2023-11-21T09:58:39-05:00
Catherine, thank you for your question. A plant patent application can be filed in Patent Center as a new utility application along with the plant transmittal forms and other required forms. Your application will then be assigned the appropriate application type. We plan to add the plant application submission type permanently into Patent Center in Spring 2024. If you have any other questions, please contact us at emod@uspto.gov.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/tips-on-taking-control-of1#comment-1700465838094
Re: Tips on taking control of your creative IP
Oman
2023-11-20T02:37:18-05:00
2023-11-20T02:37:18-05:00
Kathi, your take on creative IP rocks! Protecting ideas = investing in genius. Your breakdown of patents, trademarks, and more is insightful.
Your tool for newbies is genius! Keep shining that advocacy light!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/tips-on-taking-control-of1#comment-1700142760646
Re: Tips on taking control of your creative IP
Veronica Hanson
2023-11-16T08:52:40-05:00
2023-11-16T08:52:40-05:00
This is such an impressive yet tricky topic. It's so obvious when it comes to duplicating a hairdryer, but I honestly don't understand where it ends. With social media and digital communication, companies want us to share their content but the line is blurry if you're an entrepreneur potentially using that content to make money. I like well defined rules and I'm just not sure the lines have been drawn out yet for enough scenarios. I'm sure glad there are groups of people thinking about this topic so we can stay up to date with technology.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1700063076002
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
Wendy Koba
2023-11-15T10:44:36-05:00
2023-11-15T10:44:36-05:00
What a joke! All of this talk, and yet you turn OFF the only systems that work well
Good thing I'm retiring soon, PatentCenter is poorly constructed and does NOT exhibit 100% of the functionality of private PAIR and EFS-Web
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1700062905144
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
OCCO
2023-11-15T10:41:45-05:00
2023-11-15T10:41:45-05:00
Thank you for this question Lani. Currently Practitioner support (including paralegals) are able to prepare eTerminal Disclaimer, Corrected ADS, and Web85b for Practitioners to sign and submit. Patent Center signature requirements are based on legal requirements and current business rules. If you’re having trouble accessing or using these functions please contact our Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 1-866-217-9197 (toll-free) or by emailing ebc@uspto.gov.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1700062825638
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
OCCO
2023-11-15T10:40:25-05:00
2023-11-15T10:40:25-05:00
Thanks for your question Mitzi. You can update the application address in up to 20 applications simultaneously in Patent Center as a signed-in user. You can accomplish this in two ways.
The first is by selecting the “Manage” dropdown, then selecting “update application address,” and entering the application numbers you wish to update. The second is from the “Workbench” screen. Under the “applications” tab, check off the application(s) you wish to update, and in the drop down menu displaying the number of applications selected (on the far right of the screen) select “update application address”.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1699999373658
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
CATHERINE ANNE WHEALY
2023-11-14T17:02:53-05:00
2023-11-14T17:02:53-05:00
Unfortunately there does not seem to be any functionality for Plant Patent applications in Patent Center.
That is, it is not possible to successfully file a plant patent application, nor is it possible to pay an issuance fee for a plant patent application.
This puts us (patent agents/attorneys/pro ses) in an untenable position.
We have been promised for years that Patent Center would have functionality for plant patent applications.
When will the system be able to accommodate plant patent applications?
In the meantime, would you please provide insight on how to continue to practice plant patent application preparation & prosecution?
Thank-you.
C.A. Whealy, Ph.D.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1699614537144
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
sonika singh
2023-11-10T06:08:57-05:00
2023-11-10T06:08:57-05:00
This information proves to be valuable and insightful, offering a comprehensive understanding of the topic. It has significantly enriched my knowledge by providing a wealth of information on the subject.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1699562798413
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
Ekani
2023-11-09T15:46:38-05:00
2023-11-09T15:46:38-05:00
I'm impressed with the USPTO's dedication to modernizing their services with the introduction of the Patent Center. It seems like a significant step forward in streamlining the patent application process. The commitment to incorporating stakeholder feedback is particularly commendable. I'm curious about how the transition will be managed to minimize disruption for users. Also, the Training Mode feature sounds like a great way to get accustomed to the new system without risk. Looking forward to the additional updates and improvements that will come from ongoing user feedback!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1699389469478
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
Lani
2023-11-07T15:37:49-05:00
2023-11-07T15:37:49-05:00
Is the USPTO working on letting paralegals submit eTerminal Disclaimer and eIssue Fee payments by adding an external signature request similar to that of the ePCT functionality in Patent Center?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving-our-service-to-america#comment-1699388022538
Re: Improving our service to America’s innovators
Mitzi Booth
2023-11-07T15:13:42-05:00
2023-11-07T15:13:42-05:00
How are we going to be able to update application/fee address? It's not available in Patent Center.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/latest-updates-on-artificial-intelligence#comment-1698174549109
Re: Latest updates on artificial intelligence and intellectual property
Kevin
2023-10-24T15:09:09-04:00
2023-10-24T15:09:09-04:00
Overall, I think this article is an excellent starting point for anyone looking to learn more about AI and its potential applications. It provides a well-rounded perspective on the topic and highlights both the opportunities and challenges associated with this rapidly evolving field.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1697881381001
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
aazad hindi news
2023-10-21T05:43:01-04:00
2023-10-21T05:43:01-04:00
It was nice. I appreciate the efforts being taken π. Well done !
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1697615387683
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Marathi
2023-10-18T03:49:47-04:00
2023-10-18T03:49:47-04:00
Yes, I agree on this points.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1696972989707
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Sydney Nguyen
2023-10-10T17:23:09-04:00
2023-10-10T17:23:09-04:00
If we missed a training, will these be available somewhere else?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1696932778539
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Sunisha Choksi
2023-10-10T06:12:58-04:00
2023-10-10T06:12:58-04:00
I agree with my colleagues who have expressed in the comments that a few months to switch from TESS to the new search system is not adequate time to assess and address the number of issues identified with the Beta version.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/latest-updates-on-artificial-intelligence#comment-1696896765972
Re: Latest updates on artificial intelligence and intellectual property
SJ Harris
2023-10-09T20:12:45-04:00
2023-10-09T20:12:45-04:00
Not really sure how this issue can be solved without giving away at the very least some of the rights of the human patent holders. Also what will happen to things developed using AI. Who will own the patent for that? As AI ramps us and integrates more and more it seems the lines will be blurred to such an extent that it will pose real existential dilemmas for how patents are given out.
At this point I can imagine that patent examination is still feasible but what happens when the level required is above what a human can provide.
Interesting questions that need to be addressed sooner rather than later.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1696867122292
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Rebecca J Brandau
2023-10-09T11:58:42-04:00
2023-10-09T11:58:42-04:00
Where can we view the early training sessions on the new system if we missed the first showing?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1696609995289
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Velas Aromáticas
2023-10-06T12:33:15-04:00
2023-10-06T12:33:15-04:00
Fraud management is very important for companies. For a small company to be subject to fraud is its downfall.
Good article.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/latest-updates-on-artificial-intelligence#comment-1696226267887
Re: Latest updates on artificial intelligence and intellectual property
Cracksjet
2023-10-02T01:57:47-04:00
2023-10-02T01:57:47-04:00
As the chief executive of the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) and Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property, Kathi Vidal leads one of the largest intellectual property (IP) offices in the world and is the principal IP advisor to the President on incentivizing and protecting U.S. innovation
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working-globally-to-address-climate#comment-1696081906133
Re: Working globally to address climate change through sustainable innovation
Astronomy Assignment Help
2023-09-30T09:51:46-04:00
2023-09-30T09:51:46-04:00
Nice to see something being done to address climate change. Hopefully more organizations will join hands to secure future generations.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/latest-updates-on-artificial-intelligence#comment-1696069825134
Re: Latest updates on artificial intelligence and intellectual property
Dayliwish
2023-09-30T06:30:25-04:00
2023-09-30T06:30:25-04:00
It's truly fascinating to see how AI is becoming an integral part of the USPTO's operations and the broader innovation landscape. The exponential growth in AI-related patent applications is a testament to its transformative power.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1695926306604
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Angela
2023-09-28T14:38:26-04:00
2023-09-28T14:38:26-04:00
Will the demos be recorded so that those that cannot attend the scheduled times can view them later?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1695920387957
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Glenn Dwyer
2023-09-28T12:59:47-04:00
2023-09-28T12:59:47-04:00
Thanks for this info.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1695744737493
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Nat Kramer
2023-09-26T12:12:17-04:00
2023-09-26T12:12:17-04:00
TESS is today still working very well.
A month or two seems rather short to completely change decades of search procedures.
How about keeping TESS alive for somewhat longer while you're breaking in the new system.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-to-expect-from-our#comment-1695672437409
Re: What to expect from our new trademark search system (and why we’re replacing TESS)
Richard Schafer
2023-09-25T16:07:17-04:00
2023-09-25T16:07:17-04:00
I think most trademark attorneys can understand that the PTO might need to replace TESS, but we're uncomfortable with the extremely short time period you're allowing the beta testing. We've already uncovered quite a few differences between TESS and the new system and problems with features that have been lost. You should give serious consideration to pushing back the destruction of TESS to at least the beginning of next year.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1694080585224
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
VCCL HOSTING
2023-09-07T05:56:25-04:00
2023-09-07T05:56:25-04:00
The "where you sleep at night" requirement does NOTHING to help with fraudulent TM applications. The PTO no longer sends any kind of correspondence by physical mail, so the scammer can just select a real US address. The only parties that are hurt are legitimate applications that either do not have a physical address (because the company is virtual), to safeguard yourself from such fraudulent activities you need to have a safe and reliable web hosting provider which can help[ keeping your website at least malware free
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1693431245192
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Jesus Sanchelima
2023-08-30T17:34:05-04:00
2023-08-30T17:34:05-04:00
As a seasoned ( not old) trademark practitioner I commend the PTOs long overdue initiative to curb down the abuse of our Registers.
Keep it up.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1693424806577
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Susan Basko
2023-08-30T15:46:46-04:00
2023-08-30T15:46:46-04:00
What about people in the US who do not have a regular place of residence? There are now hundreds of thousands of people in the US who do not have a residence and who may apply for trademarks. The closest thing many people have to a steady residence is a USPS Post Office Box or a private mailbox company mailbox. Such people need a method and it cannot be a method that causes stigma attached to their name or file. Perhaps instead of asking residence address, the Trademark Office could ask if the person is a citizen or permanent resident of the US? I understand the need to combat scams, but there are many many US citizens and residents who do not have a permanent address or any residence address where they can or do regularly receive mail. This requirement seems to ignore the reality of the US today.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1693423833621
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Emil Ali
2023-08-30T15:30:33-04:00
2023-08-30T15:30:33-04:00
Might I suggest simply working towards the root cause of why these applications are being filed? Outside of the true "scams," the mass filing is done due to Amazon Brand Registry. Dealing with that organization (who has a seat on TPAC) may be the best way to fix the problem.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1693417788091
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Karen
2023-08-30T13:49:48-04:00
2023-08-30T13:49:48-04:00
A dedicated TM bar would easily eliminate scammers from misappropriating attorney identities if you combine it with a customer number or other licensing. Already the E&O insurance industry is eliminating attorneys who dabble in TM law (one or two filings annually), so the ones who file regularly are actually TM specialists and would be a good base for this dedicated bar. Limiting TM prosecution to these attorneys or to true pro se applicants (who are not using third party "DIY" companies, where I see abuse), would reduce fraud and improve the TM registration experience.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/how-the-domicile-address-requirement#comment-1693415025427
Re: How the domicile address requirement advances our trademark anti-fraud efforts
Kevin Grierson
2023-08-30T13:03:45-04:00
2023-08-30T13:03:45-04:00
The "where you sleep at night" requirement does NOTHING to help with fraudulent TM applications. The PTO no longer sends any kind of correspondence by physical mail, so the scammer can just select a real US address. The only parties that are hurt are legitimate applications that either do not have a physical address (because the company is virtual) or who wish to keep their real address private for any number of reasons (and of course the PTO's absolutely abysmal failure to safeguard supposedly hidden addresses for YEARS means that the PTO's promises of confidentiality are worthless). All of this after-the-fact backing and filling seems particularly disingenuous given this requirement has been challenged in court (and the PTO's supposed privacy protections proved worthless for tens of thousands of applicants).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting-our-military-community#comment-1693362492574
Re: Supporting our military community
BHEEM KUMAR
2023-08-29T22:28:12-04:00
2023-08-29T22:28:12-04:00
Bravo to the USPTO and the Department of Commerce for this inspiring effort!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting-our-military-community#comment-1693287626796
Re: Supporting our military community
Digital Etiquette
2023-08-29T01:40:26-04:00
2023-08-29T01:40:26-04:00
Kudos to Secretary Raimondo and Director Vidal for empowering our military community through entrepreneurship. The Hanscom workshop showcases their commitment to veterans, offering vital business skills, IP protection, and market insights. A commendable stride towards reducing unemployment and fostering innovation among military families.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working-globally-to-address-climate#comment-1693284379272
Re: Working globally to address climate change through sustainable innovation
Netfilter
2023-08-29T00:46:19-04:00
2023-08-29T00:46:19-04:00
The global collaboration between USPTO and international IP offices to promote sustainable innovation for climate change mitigation is commendable. The IP5 meeting and WIPO General Assemblies demonstrate a shared commitment to incentivize eco-friendly patents, streamline examination, and accelerate green tech adoption. Initiatives like Trademarks for Humanity, Patents for Humanity Green Energy, and partnership with WIPO GREEN showcase dedication to environmental solutions. The Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program's expansion and collaboration with NOAA highlight a comprehensive approach. This effort to bridge innovation and industry for a greener future is truly inspiring.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working-globally-to-address-climate#comment-1692811416374
Re: Working globally to address climate change through sustainable innovation
Talismani
2023-08-23T13:23:36-04:00
2023-08-23T13:23:36-04:00
It was about time after all
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working-globally-to-address-climate#comment-1691793450223
Re: Working globally to address climate change through sustainable innovation
Steve R Arey
2023-08-11T18:37:30-04:00
2023-08-11T18:37:30-04:00
The climate can be "changed" by deploying solar powered satellites with very large "reflective" panels in the suns orbit between the sun and the earth over the equator. These panels will "reflect" the suns heat and energy back into space and immediately lower the temperature of the oceans and the earth controlled by NASA.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1691731392792
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Kody Do Coin Master
2023-08-11T01:23:12-04:00
2023-08-11T01:23:12-04:00
I would characterize this as surprising, but everyone’s strong mission identity and commitment to public service here has definitely made an impression on me. People show up to work here because they genuinely want to do good and help others; this really shone through in my interactions with every person I met at NOAA, not just the researchers.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working-globally-to-address-climate#comment-1691620796776
Re: Working globally to address climate change through sustainable innovation
claire
2023-08-09T18:39:56-04:00
2023-08-09T18:39:56-04:00
ironic you flew 6 people to geneva to attend the wipo assembly discussing climate change @ 11k in CO2 emmisions instead of using the remote participation platform.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working-globally-to-address-climate#comment-1691620696499
Re: Working globally to address climate change through sustainable innovation
Bidia Tambadou
2023-08-09T18:38:16-04:00
2023-08-09T18:38:16-04:00
Merci
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting-our-military-community#comment-1691502348800
Re: Supporting our military community
Taxi Pontianak Sambas
2023-08-08T09:45:48-04:00
2023-08-08T09:45:48-04:00
The USPTO is working to support transitioning service members
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting-our-military-community#comment-1691426053800
Re: Supporting our military community
rakai
2023-08-07T12:34:13-04:00
2023-08-07T12:34:13-04:00
Bravo to the USPTO and the Department of Commerce for this inspiring effort!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1691389680722
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Live Converters
2023-08-07T02:28:00-04:00
2023-08-07T02:28:00-04:00
Patenting innovation in climate science presents a dual-edged challenge. On one hand, it incentivizes researchers and companies to invest in sustainable solutions by protecting their intellectual property. On the other hand, the urgency of addressing climate change requires open collaboration and widespread dissemination of knowledge. Balancing the need for proprietary rights with the collective goal of mitigating environmental crises is crucial. Striking a harmonious balance between patenting for incentives and promoting shared innovation could pave the way for more effective and equitable climate solutions.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting-our-military-community#comment-1691000765202
Re: Supporting our military community
Sophia Luna
2023-08-02T14:26:05-04:00
2023-08-02T14:26:05-04:00
The latest updates from the USPTO leadership showcase a commitment to modernization, collaboration, and innovation. As entrepreneurs and innovators, we can look forward to a more efficient and accessible intellectual property system that empowers us to protect our creations and drive economic growth. I commend the USPTO leadership for their dedication to shaping a future where creativity is encouraged, protected, and rewarded, and I eagerly anticipate the positive impact of their initiatives on our innovation ecosystem.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1690998806336
Re: Our plan for the future
Atharva Kashikar
2023-08-02T13:53:26-04:00
2023-08-02T13:53:26-04:00
Very informative blog, thanks for sharing it.
From,
Atharva Kashikar
Owner - EduTechToday
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1690970329835
Re: Our plan for the future
Chinmay Dhiman
2023-08-02T05:58:49-04:00
2023-08-02T05:58:49-04:00
strong plan with a proper goal-based roadmap.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1690970108619
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Chinmaya Dhiman
2023-08-02T05:55:08-04:00
2023-08-02T05:55:08-04:00
Kuddos to NOAA and USPTO for such programs for employees.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting-our-military-community#comment-1690969884129
Re: Supporting our military community
Chinmay Dhiman
2023-08-02T05:51:24-04:00
2023-08-02T05:51:24-04:00
This is so inspiring. Hope so we could start something similar in India.
Soldiers from any nation are always an inspiration.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1690369427339
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
usacharged
2023-07-26T07:03:47-04:00
2023-07-26T07:03:47-04:00
very goood information
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1690298386029
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Syed Mahmud Kabir
2023-07-25T11:19:46-04:00
2023-07-25T11:19:46-04:00
Parikha Mehta's dedication to bridging intellectual property and climate/environmental technologies at NOAA is commendable. Her insights on the importance of patenting inventions to serve the public and protect NOAA's research are valuable. Her enthusiasm for learning about NOAA's impactful work and her support in helping researchers understand patent processes highlight her commitment to driving innovation. Overall, a great example of collaboration and knowledge sharing between agencies. #IntellectualProperty #Innovation #NOAA
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1690188560221
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
ΨͺΩΨΈΩΩ ΩΩΩ
2023-07-24T04:49:20-04:00
2023-07-24T04:49:20-04:00
wonderful, and probably one of the things I will remember most about this experience.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1690182162360
Re: Our plan for the future
Ranjit sinh Thakor
2023-07-24T03:02:42-04:00
2023-07-24T03:02:42-04:00
I want to thank the entire USPTO team for their hard work and dedication. I am eager to contribute to the collective journey of evolution and I believe that this strategic plan will help us to achieve our shared goals.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1689605304630
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Athar Alatas
2023-07-17T10:48:24-04:00
2023-07-17T10:48:24-04:00
Thanks for sharing this information
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1689349017742
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
classroom management software
2023-07-14T11:36:57-04:00
2023-07-14T11:36:57-04:00
This Q&A emphasizes the significance of patenting climate science innovations, protecting NOAA's research, and benefiting the public through technology transfer. It highlights the need for awareness and guidance to encourage researchers to seek patent protection, regardless of the perceived niche or specificity of their inventions. The strong mission identity and commitment to public service at NOAA are commendable, fostering a culture of making a positive impact. The experiences of the detailees from USPTO and NOAA showcase the value of collaboration between agencies in advancing climate science and green initiatives.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1689181569153
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Fonts for instagram
2023-07-12T13:06:09-04:00
2023-07-12T13:06:09-04:00
Very nice content.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1689156250574
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Yamaris Johnson
2023-07-12T06:04:10-04:00
2023-07-12T06:04:10-04:00
Great article! The topic of patenting innovation in climate science is incredibly important in our current environmental landscape. Climate change is a pressing issue, and encouraging and protecting innovative solutions is crucial for addressing its challenges.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1689043657845
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
deep
2023-07-10T22:47:37-04:00
2023-07-10T22:47:37-04:00
Wow, Parikha! Your work at NOAA sounds fascinating! It's crucial for researchers to patent their inventions to protect NOAA's valuable work and ensure wider access to innovative solutions. Keep inspiring future innovation! ππ‘
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1688722736569
Re: Our plan for the future
Judy Watson
2023-07-07T05:38:56-04:00
2023-07-07T05:38:56-04:00
Congratulations on the release of your 2022-2026 Strategic Plan! Impressed by the inclusive approach and measurable objectives. Your commitment to driving innovation, protecting IP, and enhancing experiences is commendable. Looking forward to witnessing your impact and success. Best wishes!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1688663327651
Re: Our plan for the future
Pleasurehunt
2023-07-06T13:08:47-04:00
2023-07-06T13:08:47-04:00
I Read all the article and find out that your opinion in this topic is really helpful and also help me a lot to clear my thoughts and doubts regarding USPTO leadership.
Thanks
Regards, Pleasurehunt
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1688635969081
Re: Our plan for the future
Biswarup Guli
2023-07-06T05:32:49-04:00
2023-07-06T05:32:49-04:00
Thanks for sharing your valuable information throughout this article, I really appreciated reading this awesome piece of information.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688475529417
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Careergrow Interaction
2023-07-04T08:58:49-04:00
2023-07-04T08:58:49-04:00
In today's era parent are also hesitating to talk with their children and along this this article shows a great efforts to the improvement toward the thinking of the parents.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688368208929
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
krushi yojana
2023-07-03T03:10:08-04:00
2023-07-03T03:10:08-04:00
Parikha Mehta's dedication to protecting intellectual property and promoting innovation is inspiring! Her efforts to bridge the gap between science and patent law are commendable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688368157244
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
downloadgram
2023-07-03T03:09:17-04:00
2023-07-03T03:09:17-04:00
Parikha Mehta's exchange experience at NOAA from the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is truly inspiring. Her dedication to protecting intellectual property and promoting innovation in climate and environmental technologies is commendable. By emphasizing the importance of patents, Mehta aims to ensure that NOAA's research and technology benefit the public and inspire future advancements. Her efforts to educate researchers about the patent process and technology transfer will undoubtedly have a lasting impact. Mehta's commitment to bridging the gap between science and patent law is a valuable contribution to the field, and her work serves as a reminder of the significance of protecting inventions for the greater good.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688368050546
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
insta save
2023-07-03T03:07:30-04:00
2023-07-03T03:07:30-04:00
Nice Post thanks
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688337647518
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Darko Shapiro
2023-07-02T18:40:47-04:00
2023-07-02T18:40:47-04:00
So, how do we make sure patents actually do their job, especially with places like China where IP protection is sketchy? Can't they just rip off our stuff and not care about patents?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688280510350
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
juwaiteer.in
2023-07-02T02:48:30-04:00
2023-07-02T02:48:30-04:00
It’s been wonderful, and probably one of the things I will remember most about this experience.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1688149184004
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
MrDanzo
2023-06-30T14:19:44-04:00
2023-06-30T14:19:44-04:00
Fascinating glimpse into the intersection of climate science and patenting! It's crucial for researchers to protect their innovations, ensuring wider access and preventing misuse. Kudos to Parikha Mehta for bridging the gap and inspiring future innovation at NOAA. Looking forward to more stories like this!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1687916211426
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Dave Seth
2023-06-27T21:36:51-04:00
2023-06-27T21:36:51-04:00
I would characterize this as surprising, but everyone’s strong mission identity and commitment to public service here has definitely made an impression on me. People show up to work here because they genuinely want to do good and help others; this really shone through in my interactions with every person I met at NOAA, not just the researchers. . It’s been wonderful, and probably one of the things I will remember most about this experience. Regards:http://cpsandtypingtest.com/2-minute-typing-test
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patenting-innovation-in-climate-science#comment-1687901368730
Re: Patenting innovation in climate science
Faculdade EAD
2023-06-27T17:29:28-04:00
2023-06-27T17:29:28-04:00
Great article! Congratulations! Keep up the fantastic work!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1687614780618
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Darko Shapiro
2023-06-24T09:53:00-04:00
2023-06-24T09:53:00-04:00
Big congrats to the winning team from George Washington University Law School! You guys totally rocked the National Patent Application Drafting Competition!
Keep up the fantastic work, and know that you've made us all proud! High-fives all around!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1687454454409
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Amazon DanΔ±ΕmanlΔ±k
2023-06-22T13:20:54-04:00
2023-06-22T13:20:54-04:00
thanks for article
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1687333887844
Re: Our plan for the future
Secrets of Artificial Intelligence
2023-06-21T03:51:27-04:00
2023-06-21T03:51:27-04:00
Congratulations to the USPTO on the publication of their 2022-2026 Strategic Plan! It's encouraging to see the extensive collaboration and feedback process that went into shaping this ambitious roadmap for the future.
As a member of the public, I am excited to see the USPTO's continued efforts in driving innovation, protecting intellectual property rights, and fostering an environment that supports inclusive capitalism and global competitiveness. I look forward to witnessing the implementation of this strategic plan and the positive outcomes it will bring. Thank you to the entire USPTO team for their hard work, and I am eager to contribute to the collective journey of evolution.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1687261020489
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Amazon DanΔ±ΕmanlΔ±k
2023-06-20T07:37:00-04:00
2023-06-20T07:37:00-04:00
Good article, thanks.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1687260952136
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
HazΔ±r Site
2023-06-20T07:35:52-04:00
2023-06-20T07:35:52-04:00
thanks for article.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686848237179
Re: Our plan for the future
USPTO
2023-06-15T12:57:17-04:00
2023-06-15T12:57:17-04:00
Thank you for your question regarding reporting trademark scams. Please contact us directly to report a scam at TMScams@uspto.gov, or visit our page on protecting yourself against trademark scams for the latest information, https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/protect.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686797046108
Re: Our plan for the future
Azur Plus
2023-06-14T22:44:06-04:00
2023-06-14T22:44:06-04:00
The USPTO's 2022-2026 Strategic Plan demonstrates a comprehensive approach towards driving innovation, protecting intellectual property, and fostering global competitiveness. The emphasis on inclusivity and measurable goals reflects their commitment to advancing America's potential in the ever-evolving landscape of innovation.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686331454417
Re: Our plan for the future
EnviroTechnical Imaging
2023-06-09T13:24:14-04:00
2023-06-09T13:24:14-04:00
Good to see USPTO recognize Inclusive Capitalism as America's constitutional patent tradition. If American patentee MJ Trumble had been required to be a lettered man with a university degree from 1904 to 1931 in order to patent his carbon distillation methods and apparatus, he'd have been turned away from our patenting office with his fourth grade education. But our USPTO believed in inclusive habits, approving his and many builders' patents for decades. Today, the record shows old-fashioned capitalism Trumble engaged for three decades with USPTO. His association with this office remained inclusive for a builder-inventor, especially under challenge for ideas developed apart from major standing corporations. USPTO was a place where MJ could compete on massive playing fields, still under his own name, and in ways unique to his vision and methods of humanely safe testing. The USPTO's 'world idea arena' served this guy from when he was a nobody through becoming a world-renown inventor.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1686323878305
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Blue Cap Ventures
2023-06-09T11:17:58-04:00
2023-06-09T11:17:58-04:00
Congrats to the team...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686233038952
Re: Our plan for the future
Sue Ellen Morgan
2023-06-08T10:03:58-04:00
2023-06-08T10:03:58-04:00
A great job with the added measurable goal-based objectives and the accompanying visual graphic representation. The modified mission and vision logo is appealing. A very impressive looking publication overall.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686171702193
Re: Our plan for the future
Lauren Maria
2023-06-07T17:01:42-04:00
2023-06-07T17:01:42-04:00
How do we report counterfeit TMs to the USPTO for fraudulent use?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686159360389
Re: Our plan for the future
SABRINA YVETTE ROBINSON
2023-06-07T13:36:00-04:00
2023-06-07T13:36:00-04:00
this is awesome and I am excited about seeing the outcomes
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/our-plan-for-the-future#comment-1686152362556
Re: Our plan for the future
Vino Ellsworth
2023-06-07T11:39:22-04:00
2023-06-07T11:39:22-04:00
If you’re going to call it the 2022-2026 plan. Deliver it in 2022.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ready-set-compete-how-we#comment-1685861294798
Re: Ready, set, compete! How we’re helping veterans and military family members innovate and start new businesses
binunevi
2023-06-04T02:48:14-04:00
2023-06-04T02:48:14-04:00
Great article! I really enjoyed reading your post. It was well-written and provided valuable insights on the topic. Your explanations were clear and concise, making it easy for readers to understand the concepts. Keep up the fantastic work!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ready-set-compete-how-we#comment-1685786949895
Re: Ready, set, compete! How we’re helping veterans and military family members innovate and start new businesses
Gorgia
2023-06-03T06:09:09-04:00
2023-06-03T06:09:09-04:00
Honestly, this is the first time I am hearing something as beautiful as this.
Yes, I know America’s inventors and entrepreneurs have truly powered the nation’s economy, competitiveness, and security, making America one of the greatest countries in the world.
But what I am in awe of, is that many of America’s outstanding innovators and leaders are veterans. God bless them.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1685776194292
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Escort
2023-06-03T03:09:54-04:00
2023-06-03T03:09:54-04:00
In the realm of innovation and invention, few names stand out as brightly as Milon J. Trumble. As we delve into the treasure trove of patents, we unearth a rich tapestry of ingenuity that spans decades. With the advent of the new Patent Search tool, the USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office) has made it possible for us to explore patents dating as far back as 1920 to 1934, unlocking a realm of knowledge that was previously hidden. In this article, we will embark on a captivating journey through time, tracing the footsteps of Milon J. Trumble and shedding light on the remarkable inventions that shaped our world.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-pro-bono-program-expands#comment-1685533998346
Re: Patent Pro Bono Program expands and reaches underserved populations with free legal services
thecurrent-online.com/
2023-05-31T07:53:18-04:00
2023-05-31T07:53:18-04:00
Those are real numbers, real results. Real people benefiting from resources and opportunity, which yields robust, inclusive innovation that makes our country stronger.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1685253920578
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Filmyzilla
2023-05-28T02:05:20-04:00
2023-05-28T02:05:20-04:00
Congratulations to all the law students who participated in the National Patent Application Drafting Competition (NPADC)! Your hard work, dedication, and impressive skills in patent prosecution are truly commendable. It is inspiring to see your passion for the field of intellectual property and the level of excellence you have demonstrated throughout the competition. A special shout-out to the George Washington University Law School for securing the first-place win. Your achievements in this competition undoubtedly foreshadow a bright future in the legal world. Keep up the fantastic work, and best wishes for your future endeavors as patent attorneys!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1685253784705
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Filmyzilla
2023-05-28T02:03:04-04:00
2023-05-28T02:03:04-04:00
I was very lucky I found this article . Thanks for sharing this.....
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ready-set-compete-how-we#comment-1685253097460
Re: Ready, set, compete! How we’re helping veterans and military family members innovate and start new businesses
Filmyzilla
2023-05-28T01:51:37-04:00
2023-05-28T01:51:37-04:00
I commend the USPTO for recognizing the immense potential of veterans in entrepreneurship and actively supporting their journey. By highlighting the skills and values acquired through military service, this article showcases how veterans can thrive as business owners. It's encouraging to see the commitment to providing resources and fostering a supportive environment for these aspiring entrepreneurs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1685209472326
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
parfum
2023-05-27T13:44:32-04:00
2023-05-27T13:44:32-04:00
Artificial intelligence (AI) is undoubtedly a transformative technology with immense potential. It is encouraging to see that the USPTO is actively engaged in exploring the responsible integration of AI into their workflow and organizational practices. The focus on collaboration, both within the government and with the Department of Commerce, reflects the recognition of AI's significance in driving innovation, economic growth, and national security.
The USPTO's AI and Emerging Technology Partnership is a commendable initiative that acknowledges the growing role of AI in shaping our lives. The alignment of this partnership with the Biden Administration's National AI Initiative further underscores the commitment to advancing U.S. leadership in AI.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/don-rsquo-t-miss-it#comment-1684874588620
Re: Don’t miss it! Join us for World Intellectual Property Day
katherine Langford
2023-05-23T16:43:08-04:00
2023-05-23T16:43:08-04:00
Thank you for sharing these wonderful events and initiatives for World Intellectual Property Day! I'm excited to participate and celebrate the achievements of women inventors, creators, and entrepreneurs. Your dedication to fostering innovation and making IP more accessible to all is truly commendable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/don-rsquo-t-miss-it#comment-1684728643866
Re: Don’t miss it! Join us for World Intellectual Property Day
Spotify Mod Apk
2023-05-22T00:10:43-04:00
2023-05-22T00:10:43-04:00
I'm curious to learn if there are any similar festivities or gatherings scheduled in Spain, or if there are any representatives from our country involved in these global discussions. Understanding this information is crucial to me, as it holds significant importance. If such events or participation are lacking, it would be valuable to understand the reasons behind it.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1684563044880
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Reading lover
2023-05-20T02:10:44-04:00
2023-05-20T02:10:44-04:00
This was really one of the few articles that I benefited from. I liked many of the pictures in the article, but the pictures with military service members suggested a lot of safety. I certainly did not forget the basic idea, which is innovation, and I liked the picture that was innovative in itself, which is "The Year in Numbers", You are really amazing people. Keep up the work. I am sure that by communicating your ideas, you will make the United States and even the world a better place. Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1684479054214
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
juwaiteer.in
2023-05-19T02:50:54-04:00
2023-05-19T02:50:54-04:00
Congratulations to the winning team from George Washington University Law School.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new-trademarks-for-humanity-awards#comment-1684467431294
Re: New Trademarks for Humanity awards competition: Branding a better future
Jack Daniel
2023-05-18T23:37:11-04:00
2023-05-18T23:37:11-04:00
The Trademarks for Humanity Awards competition is a brilliant way to highlight the importance of trademarks in driving positive change. Thanks for sharing this kind of information
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new-trademarks-for-humanity-awards#comment-1684404202973
Re: New Trademarks for Humanity awards competition: Branding a better future
thetecheducation
2023-05-18T06:03:22-04:00
2023-05-18T06:03:22-04:00
The Trademarks for Humanity Awards competition is a brilliant way to highlight the importance of trademarks in driving positive change. It's refreshing to see the USPTO encouraging businesses and individuals from diverse backgrounds to participate and contribute to environmental improvement.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1684342896371
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
May
2023-05-17T13:01:36-04:00
2023-05-17T13:01:36-04:00
It's very useful information, thanks to the author
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1684314369264
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
thecurrent-online
2023-05-17T05:06:09-04:00
2023-05-17T05:06:09-04:00
The USPTO's focus on the responsible introduction of AI in innovation is crucial. As AI continues to shape our world, it's essential to address questions about inventorship and patentability. Striking the right balance between promoting innovation and addressing potential risks is key. Collaboration and public input are vital in navigating the opportunities and challenges presented by AI. Let's ensure a measured and inclusive approach to harnessing the full potential of this powerful technology for the benefit of society.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1684223889496
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
airports details
2023-05-16T03:58:09-04:00
2023-05-16T03:58:09-04:00
The rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has undoubtedly impacted the innovation process, allowing for faster and more efficient development of new products and services. However, this has also raised questions about the role of the patent system in fostering innovation and balancing the interests of inventors and the public.
On one hand, AI has the potential to revolutionize the way we approach patentability and patent infringement. For example, AI can be used to analyze vast amounts of data and identify potential areas of patent infringement, allowing for more efficient and accurate identification of potential infringers. Additionally, AI can be used to automate certain parts of the patent application process, such as prior art searches and drafting patent applications, making it easier and less costly for inventors to obtain patent protection.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1684223800224
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
brealant
2023-05-16T03:56:40-04:00
2023-05-16T03:56:40-04:00
Congratulations to the winning team
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1683890447633
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Currentonline
2023-05-12T07:20:47-04:00
2023-05-12T07:20:47-04:00
For the last six months leading up to the national round, the student teams worked on hypothetical invention statements, sounds good
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new-trademarks-for-humanity-awards#comment-1683871699067
Re: New Trademarks for Humanity awards competition: Branding a better future
Venture Jolt
2023-05-12T02:08:19-04:00
2023-05-12T02:08:19-04:00
The Trademarks for Humanity Awards competition is a brilliant way to highlight the importance of trademarks in driving positive change. It's refreshing to see the USPTO encouraging businesses and individuals from diverse backgrounds to participate and contribute to environmental improvement.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1683814639648
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Udioko Udom
2023-05-11T10:17:19-04:00
2023-05-11T10:17:19-04:00
Congratulations to the winning team from George Washington University Law School.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new-trademarks-for-humanity-awards#comment-1683790576108
Re: New Trademarks for Humanity awards competition: Branding a better future
Benton
2023-05-11T03:36:16-04:00
2023-05-11T03:36:16-04:00
"Step right up, folks! Get ready for the inside scoop on the exciting world of patents and trademarks straight from the USPTO Director's Blog. With the latest updates from USPTO leadership, you'll be in the know and ahead of the game. Don't miss out on this exclusive opportunity to stay informed and inspired!"
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/don-rsquo-t-miss-it#comment-1683731103858
Re: Don’t miss it! Join us for World Intellectual Property Day
María Logroño Zarraga
2023-05-10T11:05:03-04:00
2023-05-10T11:05:03-04:00
It would be great to know if there are any similar celebrations or events planned in Spain or if there are representatives from our country participating in these international discussions. if not - then why? I think its important
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1683728593225
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Katie Logan
2023-05-10T10:23:13-04:00
2023-05-10T10:23:13-04:00
It's good that the USPTO is working on AI in inventions, but they need to do more to handle risks. We should involve more experts and keep an eye on AI's impact, making sure we encourage innovation while protecting everyone's interests.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1683624871183
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Kotelit
2023-05-09T05:34:31-04:00
2023-05-09T05:34:31-04:00
Very Informative Content.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1683624723667
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Kotelit
2023-05-09T05:32:03-04:00
2023-05-09T05:32:03-04:00
Congratulation
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1683611587826
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Leedaily
2023-05-09T01:53:07-04:00
2023-05-09T01:53:07-04:00
Wow, it sounds like the National Patent Application Drafting Competition is a real test of the participants' skills and knowledge in patent law! I can only imagine the excitement and anticipation leading up to the final round, not to mention the sense of accomplishment for the winning team from George Washington University Law School. It's great to see such enthusiastic participation from law students all over the country, and I have no doubt that these budding attorneys will continue to make significant contributions to the field of intellectual property. Kudos to all involved!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1683557640830
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Financial
2023-05-08T10:54:00-04:00
2023-05-08T10:54:00-04:00
As of my knowledge cutoff date of September 2021, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) was Andrei Iancu, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump and served from 2018 to January 2021.
However, it is possible that there have been changes in USPTO leadership since then. I recommend checking the USPTO website or news sources for the most up-to-date information.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1683553973769
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Chinmay Kumar Panigrahi
2023-05-08T09:52:53-04:00
2023-05-08T09:52:53-04:00
Very helpful, one of the most inspiring journey so far.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing-the-winners-of-the#comment-1683131603332
Re: Announcing the winners of the 2023 National Patent Application Drafting Competition
Holoseal
2023-05-03T12:33:23-04:00
2023-05-03T12:33:23-04:00
Congratulation to Winning Team
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1683111026073
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Leedaily
2023-05-03T06:50:26-04:00
2023-05-03T06:50:26-04:00
From tinkering with an oscilloscope to leading the charge in IP law and innovation, this director's journey is proof that a spark of curiosity can ignite a flame of passion. Here's to data-driven decisions and making an impact in the world of intellectual property!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1682469132071
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Rarigenius
2023-04-25T20:32:12-04:00
2023-04-25T20:32:12-04:00
Wow, this is really a beautiful article, you are wonderful people, and after this article I believed in the importance of innovation more, and by the nature of my love for proportions and numbers, the last paragraph was my favorite and because it talks about numbers, it was brief and contains valuable information, thank you again!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1682088057025
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Triple Hash
2023-04-21T10:40:57-04:00
2023-04-21T10:40:57-04:00
Very Informative Content.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1682069471980
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Babu kaji Sitaula
2023-04-21T05:31:11-04:00
2023-04-21T05:31:11-04:00
Awesome article. It has been an honor to collaborate with so many gifted people and to have the chance to have a good influence on the intellectual property industry. Congratulations!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1681944595169
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Stan Kippen
2023-04-19T18:49:55-04:00
2023-04-19T18:49:55-04:00
There is nothing in place to prevent IP theft using AI, reconfiguring wordage in order to expedite a patent ahead of the rightful owner. Trade Secrets will be compromised by AI services preying on intellectuals while pretending to be smart. It is all a scam. Machines don't learn, they process information at incredible speeds that imitate thinking. AI should never have rights other than patent rights of their function.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1681852971879
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Scot ringa
2023-04-18T17:22:51-04:00
2023-04-18T17:22:51-04:00
Need more information.would live to attend. Ai is amazing when can read iT several ways
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1681849385617
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Piavazelle Chaney Jerome
2023-04-18T16:23:05-04:00
2023-04-18T16:23:05-04:00
I am only now reading up on this but - I would certainly feel my invention could be stolen as it could perform as a physical vase unit for AI robotics on wheels
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1681848886682
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Sambulo Kunene
2023-04-18T16:14:46-04:00
2023-04-18T16:14:46-04:00
Thank you for your article.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/with-artificial-intelligence-speeding-the#comment-1681848284538
Re: With artificial intelligence speeding the innovation process, what does that mean for invention and a properly balanced patent system?
Mona Khanna
2023-04-18T16:04:44-04:00
2023-04-18T16:04:44-04:00
Interested in the US Government, US Department of Commerce and USPTO’s view on Microsoft stealing trademarks and intellectual property from US citizens using Microsoft cloud and Microsoft AI’s.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1681776569489
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
EnviroTechnical Imaging
2023-04-17T20:09:29-04:00
2023-04-17T20:09:29-04:00
Your team’s accomplishments in your first year are amazing. I tried the new Patent Search tool and found patents I’ve been watching on Google Patents over 20 years for inventor Milon J. Trumble now posted with easy access @ our USPTO spanning 1920 to 1934. It will be fun to see his earlier patents dating back to 1904. Our own USPTO will then cover more history by Inventor Name. Students can then be taught about inventors and technologies whose U.S. beginnings remained too foggy in the past to patent-specify. Better USPTO detail will help museums post more patent information beside precious artifacts and inside teaching exhibits. And when we celebrate MJ Trumble as the first U.S. inventor to register his patents in every country of the world in 1916, students and inventors will finally see the genius simplicity of America’s invention history spanning asphalt to solid rocket fuel. Plus we’ll learn how U.S. inventors performed with their counterpart patentees in other countries.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1681746530107
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Darko
2023-04-17T11:48:50-04:00
2023-04-17T11:48:50-04:00
Thank you for sharing your experience and goals at the USPTO. It is evident that you prioritize driving inclusive innovation, protecting intellectual property, and maximizing agency operations for the benefit of all stakeholders. Your commitment to making data-driven decisions and taking action is commendable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1681740642098
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Jason Thompson
2023-04-17T10:10:42-04:00
2023-04-17T10:10:42-04:00
very good decision for the people. informative and useful post. Keep it up. Thanks!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1681659271524
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Rajubhai
2023-04-16T11:34:31-04:00
2023-04-16T11:34:31-04:00
I am really impressed with the post. Thanks for sharing useful information.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1681645035827
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
mosttechs
2023-04-16T07:37:15-04:00
2023-04-16T07:37:15-04:00
IP ecosystem to enhance U.S. competitiveness, create jobs, and grow our economy, you must bring more people into the innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystem and give them the support they need to bring their ideas to market.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new-trademarks-for-humanity-awards#comment-1681572518721
Re: New Trademarks for Humanity awards competition: Branding a better future
James Curry
2023-04-15T11:28:38-04:00
2023-04-15T11:28:38-04:00
Great idea and an amazing related concept. Our planet faces unprecedented challenges, and your award will help encourage more people to get involved as the award also showcases those trademark and servicemark holders helping the environment! Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/one-year-of-bringing-innovation#comment-1681474687830
Re: One year of bringing innovation to impact
Rahul
2023-04-14T08:18:07-04:00
2023-04-14T08:18:07-04:00
I read this post your post so nice and very informative post thanks for sharing this post.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/women-s-history-month-driving#comment-1680712914332
Re: Spotlight on Debbie Stephens: Driving change and modernization in information technology systems
Katherine Munoz
2023-04-05T12:41:54-04:00
2023-04-05T12:41:54-04:00
Debbie is a great leader and have enjoyed getting to know her! Looking forward to seeing your continued leadership!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/women-s-history-month-driving#comment-1680013142857
Re: Spotlight on Debbie Stephens: Driving change and modernization in information technology systems
Emilia
2023-03-28T10:19:02-04:00
2023-03-28T10:19:02-04:00
Debbie, it's truly inspiring to hear about your experiences as a leader in the information technology sector and your commitment to continual improvement.
Your dedication to listening to your staff and welcoming their ideas for change is a testament to your leadership style and your positive impact on your team.
Your personal story of growing up with strong women role models and learning from their experiences is powerful.
It's clear that their influence has helped shape the leader you are today, and it's heartening to see you paying that forward by being a role model for the next generation of women innovators.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/women-s-history-month-driving#comment-1679852554660
Re: Spotlight on Debbie Stephens: Driving change and modernization in information technology systems
Ytmp3
2023-03-26T13:42:34-04:00
2023-03-26T13:42:34-04:00
I think women are the pillar of every family and as we heard since our childhood that behind every successful man there is a women.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/free-resources-inventors-and-entrepreneurs#comment-1679412837171
Re: Free resources inventors and entrepreneurs need to know about
Lucky Vang
2023-03-21T11:33:57-04:00
2023-03-21T11:33:57-04:00
Thank you for this blog post! These are amazing resources which many of us in the invention community probably don't know about. Please sticky if possible! Thanks again!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/women-s-history-month-driving#comment-1678818990944
Re: Spotlight on Debbie Stephens: Driving change and modernization in information technology systems
Derek Freyberg
2023-03-14T14:36:30-04:00
2023-03-14T14:36:30-04:00
" We survey our staff for their ideas, we empower them to try, fail, learn, and succeed, and then we recognize them for the good work that they do. I am committed to listening to my staff and welcoming their ideas for change, so that we can keep improving for our employees and delivering value to our customers."
But not a word about surveying the customers to see what they want/need, like systems that don't go down, that meet the need for friendly usability, and that don't ask for proprietary software to use (the .docx fiasco).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1678720411123
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Monique Kuykendoll Quarterman
2023-03-13T11:13:31-04:00
2023-03-13T11:13:31-04:00
Thank you for being the champion for equity that you are, James! Our communities are grateful for your service, perspective, and actions that have made the US a better place for everyone to innovate. Excellent article!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/women-s-history-month-driving#comment-1678715901047
Re: Spotlight on Debbie Stephens: Driving change and modernization in information technology systems
Donna Miller
2023-03-13T09:58:21-04:00
2023-03-13T09:58:21-04:00
Women are the superglue of the family!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1678688545138
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Advocate Tapan Choudhury
2023-03-13T02:22:25-04:00
2023-03-13T02:22:25-04:00
Great article James! Congratulations on your years of service and the many contributions you have made to the USPTO. You indeed have inspired and mentored many. I am very proud of you! Once again, CONGRATULATIONS!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/equip-hq-empowering-students-and#comment-1678688254523
Re: EquIP HQ: Empowering students and teachers with invention and intellectual property skills
Taps9 Legal Services
2023-03-13T02:17:34-04:00
2023-03-13T02:17:34-04:00
The Equip program is doing a remarkable job of empowering students and giving them the tools they need to thrive in their future employment. I would like to learn more about the exact tools and forms of assistance that the program provides to students, as well as how it assesses its effectiveness and impact.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677772366092
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Patrick Barcia
2023-03-02T10:52:46-05:00
2023-03-02T10:52:46-05:00
Congratulations, Mr. James O. Wilson! Great article and truly one of USPTO's great leader.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/connecting-entrepreneurs-with-government-resources#comment-1677765514645
Re: Connecting entrepreneurs with government resources at CES
Jack
2023-03-02T08:58:34-05:00
2023-03-02T08:58:34-05:00
Great article Derrick! I am very proud of you! Once again, CONGRATULATIONS!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677679987024
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Michael
2023-03-01T09:13:07-05:00
2023-03-01T09:13:07-05:00
Great article James! I am very proud of you! Once again, CONGRATULATIONS!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677636627720
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Anthony Edwards
2023-02-28T21:10:27-05:00
2023-02-28T21:10:27-05:00
Thanks for sharing a piece of not only African-American history, but also America's history James!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677612765019
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
D. Jones
2023-02-28T14:32:45-05:00
2023-02-28T14:32:45-05:00
Great article James! Congratulations on your 34+ years of service and the many contributions you have made to the USPTO. You indeed have inspired and mentored many. I am very proud of you! Once again, CONGRATULATIONS!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677566973794
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Balaram Thapa
2023-02-28T01:49:33-05:00
2023-02-28T01:49:33-05:00
It is wonderful and privileged to know James and his accomplishments are inspiring. He is Black History! thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677510976280
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Daniel Samwel
2023-02-27T10:16:16-05:00
2023-02-27T10:16:16-05:00
James is an amazing asset for the USPTO. The individual care he shows for each Examiner at the Detroit office is greatly appreciated.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/equip-hq-empowering-students-and#comment-1677504319248
Re: EquIP HQ: Empowering students and teachers with invention and intellectual property skills
Tishi M Roberts
2023-02-27T08:25:19-05:00
2023-02-27T08:25:19-05:00
Interested in learning more
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/equip-hq-empowering-students-and#comment-1677436962294
Re: EquIP HQ: Empowering students and teachers with invention and intellectual property skills
usps
2023-02-26T13:42:42-05:00
2023-02-26T13:42:42-05:00
It's impressive to see the Equip program making strides in empowering students and equipping them with the necessary tools to succeed in their future careers. I'm curious to know more about the specific types of resources and support that the program offers to students, as well as how it measures success and impact.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1677289358675
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
Denise Cherry
2023-02-24T20:42:38-05:00
2023-02-24T20:42:38-05:00
I am very interested in the focus of USPTO’s efforts to combat counterfeits. I think it’s a huge problem, and must be tackled in all areas. It harms the progress of all community stakeholders from big to the smaller sectors. Counterfeiters may not care about the environment and may use dangerous and harmful pollutants; exploit laborers which can promote trafficking and slavery; cheat our infrastructure by not paying their fair share of taxes that would build roads, schools, etc; cause fire hazards with poorly inspected goods; and even put lives at risk with counterfeit medical devices or medications. Everyone loses. It’s also a balancing act on how to make authentic products obtainable to more consumers without cheapening the brand.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677269497275
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Dave P.
2023-02-24T15:11:37-05:00
2023-02-24T15:11:37-05:00
Wonderful to hear a part of the story of your journey through life. Your contributions to the USPTO and beyond are greatly appreciated.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677256791551
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Charlie C.
2023-02-24T11:39:51-05:00
2023-02-24T11:39:51-05:00
Great article, James! Thank you for sharing this story of your life journey and inspiring rise at the USPTO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677256039685
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Angela Ortiz
2023-02-24T11:27:19-05:00
2023-02-24T11:27:19-05:00
Awesome article! I wish there was room to detail all the encouragement, assistance and mentoring James has provided to so many of us along the way.
James, it is nice to see you emerge brightly, as an example of how to innovatively step out and reach success. Proud of you, Sir! Thank you for the association.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677246557772
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Sheree Brown
2023-02-24T08:49:17-05:00
2023-02-24T08:49:17-05:00
A trailblazer is a person who blazes a trail for others to follow. Through his services to the USPTO community and beyond, Mr. Wilson continues to serve and lead in such an impactful way. Mr. Wilson, is truly a rare gem and trailblazer throughout the USPTO community. It's been a great honor to be afforded the opportunity to work with Mr. Wilson!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677244222112
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Michael Salley
2023-02-24T08:10:22-05:00
2023-02-24T08:10:22-05:00
I am proud and privileged to know James and his accomplishments are inspiring. He is Black History! I have worked in USPTO's office of EEO and Diversity for more than 20 years, James has had a great impact on diversity and the PTO community.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677178449373
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
Schquita G.
2023-02-23T13:54:09-05:00
2023-02-23T13:54:09-05:00
Over 30 years at the PTO and you've accomplished so much! Great read!!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/black-history-month-advocating-for#comment-1677167206228
Re: Black History Month: Advocating for and supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion at the USPTO
melenie
2023-02-23T10:46:46-05:00
2023-02-23T10:46:46-05:00
Great article!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1676562908800
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
David Happe
2023-02-16T10:55:08-05:00
2023-02-16T10:55:08-05:00
You don't represent entrepreneurs. You represent attorneys. You should consider having a small business owner take a seat at your table.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/connecting-entrepreneurs-with-government-resources#comment-1676562462918
Re: Connecting entrepreneurs with government resources at CES
David Happe
2023-02-16T10:47:42-05:00
2023-02-16T10:47:42-05:00
The irony of your article on connecting with entrepreneurs. Read my final entry to my entrepreneurial application for a trademark. The USPTO is the OPPOSITE of US entrepreneur friendly. See Serial Number 97168063 and my final response to the attorney as I abandon this application.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/connecting-entrepreneurs-with-government-resources#comment-1676221455217
Re: Connecting entrepreneurs with government resources at CES
Douglas Kim
2023-02-12T12:04:15-05:00
2023-02-12T12:04:15-05:00
Nice to see Clemson University and its CU-ICAR recognized in that first photo. Clemson continues to be a leader in education, research and industry collaboration includes its graduate degree programs in automotive engineering, as highlighted in this photo.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1675873930207
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
USPTO
2023-02-08T11:32:10-05:00
2023-02-08T11:32:10-05:00
Thank you for your question about the next TPAC public meeting. It will be held on Friday April 28, 2023.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/help-our-nation-honor-the#comment-1675847839336
Re: Help our nation honor the innovators who have inspired you
kalyee
2023-02-08T04:17:19-05:00
2023-02-08T04:17:19-05:00
Thanks for reminding us of the importance of honoring our nation's innovators. The USPTO plays a crucial role in recognizing and supporting their contributions to society. Keep up the great work!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1675818250694
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
Erik Pelton
2023-02-07T20:04:10-05:00
2023-02-07T20:04:10-05:00
When will the next public meeting of TPAC be held. As of this post, the TPAC webpage lists several upcoming executive sessions, but no public meetings.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1675373273316
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
USPTO
2023-02-02T16:27:53-05:00
2023-02-02T16:27:53-05:00
We welcome applications from all those interested in serving on TPAC! We will be accepting nominations later this year and encourage trademark practitioners from small- to mid-size firms to apply. Thank you for the comment! https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/organizational-offices/public-advisory-committees
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1675361870552
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
Austin McLeod
2023-02-02T13:17:50-05:00
2023-02-02T13:17:50-05:00
You should block bots from seeing anything filed within the last 30 days without first logging in...so they don't scoop up domain names like they have been doing by trolling the uspto TESS database in nearly real time. I've seen within 7 days, and now I've seen within 7 minutes...or make an automation to automatically register domain names with trademark filings... #deviousBots
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-rsquo-s-trademark-public#comment-1675355805861
Re: USPTO’s Trademark Public Advisory Committee: Where we’ve been and where we’re headed
Annette P. Heller
2023-02-02T11:36:45-05:00
2023-02-02T11:36:45-05:00
As an attorney who has practiced in the area of trademark law for over 40 years, I was unaware of this committee. However, in looking at the membership of the committee I was surprised not to see any members from a small or mid-size IP practice. It would be good to see a broader representation on this committee especially in light of Section C of the charter.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-unleashing-american-innovators-act#comment-1675161383646
Re: The Unleashing American Innovators Act: Promoting inclusive innovation under the new law
Innovator Visa
2023-01-31T05:36:23-05:00
2023-01-31T05:36:23-05:00
I agree. The US needs a start-up visa or innovator visa route like many of the other leading nations such as Canada, UK, Germany, Australia etc. The immigration rules as they stand are driving innovation out of the US to these countries.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-unleashing-american-innovators-act#comment-1675018749634
Re: The Unleashing American Innovators Act: Promoting inclusive innovation under the new law
Omar
2023-01-29T13:59:09-05:00
2023-01-29T13:59:09-05:00
This is an excellent initiative. However, I would also recommend that the US government look into reforming the immigration system to enable foreign entrepreneurs to move to Canada and establish their innovative business ideas.
According to a 2017 report by the National Foundation for American Policy, 44% of the founders of billion-dollar startup companies in the US were immigrants. This demonstrates the important role that immigration has played in driving innovation and entrepreneurship in the country.
Many foreign entrepreneurs are moving to Canada, Ireland and the UK as all 3 countries have start-up visa or innovator visa programs. Its high time that the US reform its immigration system to welcome foregn investors and entrepreneurs in a timely fashion.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1674558408194
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
jabbar huusain
2023-01-24T06:06:48-05:00
2023-01-24T06:06:48-05:00
I hate paragraph autonumbering. When submitting amendments or substitute specification, everything gets messed up. Can you eliminate the requirement for paragraph numbering? More generally, your plan to fine people for not using the docx format shows that it is inferior. If it were actually better, people would switch formats voluntarily. I would prefer to use docx but your requirements for autonumbered paragraphs make it an inferior format.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1672154404915
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
The Maker Point
2022-12-27T10:20:04-05:00
2022-12-27T10:20:04-05:00
Good Morning: It would be very helpful if there were a PRINT button available when a submission has been SAVED in Patent Center. Our process is for assistants/secretaries to upload and save submissions, print the screen evidencing that the documents have been uploaded/saved, followed by a review by the attorney of record. The "Saved Submission" print-out is saved to our document management system as part of the filing. Thank you
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1671981934936
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
Carl Oppedahl
2022-12-25T10:25:34-05:00
2022-12-25T10:25:34-05:00
The practitioner community has pushed back on this ill-conceived DOCX initiative. See "USPTO blinked on the non-DOCX surcharge" at blog.oppedahl.com/?p=8662 .
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1671553658436
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
Alan BURNETT
2022-12-20T11:27:38-05:00
2022-12-20T11:27:38-05:00
Would the USPTO please use clean versions of PDFs rather than scanned versions! We are 22 years into the 21st century. Presumably the scanned PDFs are for a work flow the begins with paper copies (rarely used now except under emergencies when EFS is down).
I tried using DOCX a while back and was stunned my document was converted to a scanned PDF with a name that was different than used for the DOCX.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1671469893589
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
Anonymous
2022-12-19T12:11:33-05:00
2022-12-19T12:11:33-05:00
I tried DOCX back when you were doing it manually through a markup. I've essentially told my clients they have an increased filing charge. I don't want DOCX as its inaccurate and can cause issues when submitting- as admitted in your "tips" identified above you still have that happening in this iteration.
I realize its easier and reduces fees FOR the office, but until you have a 100% functional system - you shouldn't shift from one that is 100% accurate. And yes - the three or four filings I did under that original e-filing program were THOROUGHLY messed up - especially with headings and formatting.
PS - I reported this to the help line but they said they were not "working" on this - you're ADS in the Patent Center does not provide for the publication opt out for non-foreign filed applications, at least when I filed two months ago.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1671466567268
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
Frank Rosenberg
2022-12-19T11:16:07-05:00
2022-12-19T11:16:07-05:00
I hate paragraph autonumbering. When submitting amendments or substitute specification, everything gets messed up. Can you eliminate the requirement for paragraph numbering? More generally, your plan to fine people for not using the docx format shows that it is inferior. If it were actually better, people would switch formats voluntarily. I would prefer to use docx but your requirements for autonumbered paragraphs make it an inferior format.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1671464288563
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
Nedy Calderon
2022-12-19T10:38:08-05:00
2022-12-19T10:38:08-05:00
Good morning! I have been filing the DOCX version of the application and a PDF version every time the Auxiliary PDF option doesn't pop up on the screen. I hope this is acceptable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/top-three-helpful-tips-for1#comment-1671461651705
Re: Top three helpful tips for filing patent applications as you move to DOCX format
Alesia Mungons
2022-12-19T09:54:11-05:00
2022-12-19T09:54:11-05:00
Good Morning:
It would be very helpful if there were a PRINT button available when a submission has been SAVED in Patent Center. Our process is for assistants/secretaries to upload and save submissions, print the screen evidencing that the documents have been uploaded/saved, followed by a review by the attorney of record. The "Saved Submission" print-out is saved to our document management system as part of the filing.
Thank you,
Alesia
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/recognizing-life-saving-covid-19#comment-1671134176434
Re: Recognizing life-saving COVID-19 innovations
Demetrius M White
2022-12-15T14:56:16-05:00
2022-12-15T14:56:16-05:00
Under Davison AKA invention land took on a project of mines was that filed a patent to which led to the creation of a book application is about doctors on the go to have x-ray capabilities to iPods and etc, related to the phone be able to text if a person have any contact with the COVID 19 virus, was led to Covid 19 virus to start contact tracing app will allow people to see where the disease were highly spread and toward contact, allow the government to be able to predict high cases Covid -19 virus was being spread this would lead to the application of me designing the to put contact tracing to a higher form and chasing the air the ocean and other applications that contact traces can be applicable to Make a better health system awareness. Which also maybe design a cell phone and deal with stuff with NASA applications on having systems in the sky for cell phones etc etc
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/jumpstart-your-career-with-leap#comment-1669153599645
Re: Jumpstart your career with LEAP!
USPTO
2022-11-22T16:46:39-05:00
2022-11-22T16:46:39-05:00
Thank you for your question. The USPTO is a fee-funded agency whose programs are supported through the application and maintenance fees filed by our stakeholders. For any additional questions on LEAP, please contact leap@uspto.gov.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/jumpstart-your-career-with-leap#comment-1669140885748
Re: Jumpstart your career with LEAP!
Not A Cucumber
2022-11-22T13:14:45-05:00
2022-11-22T13:14:45-05:00
How is this particular program funded? Is it funded using tax money, donations from wealthy patrons, etc?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/see-yourself-at-the-uspto#comment-1668533837723
Re: See yourself at the USPTO: Find a student program for you
Lewis Linden
2022-11-15T12:37:17-05:00
2022-11-15T12:37:17-05:00
What are the benefits of interning at the USPTO?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/hispanic-inventors-and-entrepreneurs-bring#comment-1665756228579
Re: Hispanic inventors and entrepreneurs bring new technologies to market
CaterFiller
2022-10-14T10:03:48-04:00
2022-10-14T10:03:48-04:00
Wonderfull!! Hats off to you guys!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/hispanic-inventors-and-entrepreneurs-bring#comment-1665590350686
Re: Hispanic inventors and entrepreneurs bring new technologies to market
Property Manager In Illinois
2022-10-12T11:59:10-04:00
2022-10-12T11:59:10-04:00
This is excellent! Latinos need more representation in entrepreneurship!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1665159479785
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
USPTO
2022-10-07T12:17:59-04:00
2022-10-07T12:17:59-04:00
Thank you for your feedback @Debashis ghosh! We don’t currently have plans to add Safari but will keep this in mind as we work to improve our system. We do plan to further simplify the design to improve the user experience on mobile devices. To address pop-ups, you can adjust your browser settings under “Privacy and security” in Chrome, or under “Cookies and site permissions” in Edge. If you have further questions, please email us at psf@uspto.gov.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1665048549628
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Edwin SIEW
2022-10-06T05:29:09-04:00
2022-10-06T05:29:09-04:00
You are too generous with your self-praise. No one felt the need for overly interactive pages. I recommend you let dead things be dead.
Since you are so certain about the quality and welcome of this new search tool, there is no harm keeping the old Public Pair online, and leave those of us who have no time to attend to your intrusion to use the old Public Pair in peace.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1664981626563
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Jacob
2022-10-05T10:53:46-04:00
2022-10-05T10:53:46-04:00
The new search is like a cruel joke, at least to laymen inventors. What was relatively easy and straightforward now requires "training materials." Who wanted this?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/go-for-real-an-innovative#comment-1664960754525
Re: Go for Real: An innovative USPTO partnership helping young consumers avoid dangerous fakes
Michael Edward Sampson
2022-10-05T05:05:54-04:00
2022-10-05T05:05:54-04:00
Independent Energy Systems is more than willing to actively participate in the Go For Real campaign in any capacity needed or suitable to the mission parameters. Independent Energy Systems
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1664932967969
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Debashis ghosh
2022-10-04T21:22:47-04:00
2022-10-04T21:22:47-04:00
I enjoyed using my iPad to do patent searches on the legacy systems. Since I use safari, the results no longer show on the new patent public search. I have to go to my PC and use chrome to do these searches. Any plans to also add safari?
Many times the results do not show up due to browser closing the pop ups. Have to manually go and allow to pop ups. Can we make the experience more seamless?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/standard-essential-patent-policy-and#comment-1664901050047
Re: Standard essential patent policy and practices: We want to hear from you!
Patricia E Chandler
2022-10-04T12:30:50-04:00
2022-10-04T12:30:50-04:00
I would love to attend the 2023 symposium.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1664895197121
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Marcia
2022-10-04T10:53:17-04:00
2022-10-04T10:53:17-04:00
New Public Search options are limited when it comes to downloading results. No hyperlinks to full text patents to share.
Command searching goes back to early 80s.
Is there a way to combine search results or eliminate certain search results?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advancing-u-s-interests-abroad#comment-1662719578828
Re: Advancing U.S. interests abroad
emmanuel
2022-09-09T06:32:58-04:00
2022-09-09T06:32:58-04:00
Every move to increase and broaden the US influence is a welcome development.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/providing-clear-guidance-on-patent#comment-1661346811048
Re: Providing clear guidance on patent subject matter eligibility
Matthew Henry
2022-08-24T09:13:31-04:00
2022-08-24T09:13:31-04:00
We just need more guidance overall regarding 101. Specifically in machine learning.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1661260534844
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
USPTO
2022-08-23T09:15:34-04:00
2022-08-23T09:15:34-04:00
For detailed information on how to use Patent Public Search, check out our web based tutorial "How to Conduct a Preliminary U.S. Patent Search: a Step by Step Strategy," located here: https://www.uspto.gov/video/cbt/prelim-patent-search/index.html
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1661259657533
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Mike W.
2022-08-23T09:00:57-04:00
2022-08-23T09:00:57-04:00
Are there youtube or other video webinars that show what Patent Public Search is and how to search it? It is not intuitive at all and a visual training session that I can watch at my leisure (repeatedly) would be appreciated. Thanks. Mike W.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-the-management-of-patent#comment-1661252779850
Re: Modernizing the management of patent applications with Patent Center
Mark
2022-08-23T07:06:19-04:00
2022-08-23T07:06:19-04:00
I agree, It’s unfortunate that Patent Center doesn’t work on mobile devices like the iPhone
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1661027297214
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Nathan
2022-08-20T16:28:17-04:00
2022-08-20T16:28:17-04:00
The new system upgrade will be difficult for so many people to migrate to.
Using the new search system will be difficult for me. Please do not retire the legacy systems yet. Personally, the Legacy system is working perfectly fine for me. I won't want to start learning how to use the new system please.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1660322963599
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Tomeka
2022-08-12T12:49:23-04:00
2022-08-12T12:49:23-04:00
On August 18 and 19, webinars will be offered on the Patent Public Search tool. For more information, including future training dates, visit the following:
the USPTO Events page: https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events
or
the Patent Public Search series page: https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/events/patent-public-search.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1660218989703
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Randall S. Svihla
2022-08-11T07:56:29-04:00
2022-08-11T07:56:29-04:00
I don't want to use the new search system. Please don't retire the legacy systems. I know how to use them and they work perfectly for me, so I don't want to waste my time learning the new system.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1660211757084
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Damian Porcari
2022-08-11T05:55:57-04:00
2022-08-11T05:55:57-04:00
Mr. Foster,
USPTO has a Patent Search Training Program hosted online August 30, 10-11:30am Central on the USPTO Events Page: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/basics/help-patents/learn-how-conduct-patent-search-uspto-texas-regional-office
The USPTO Midwest Regional Office oversees outreach to Ohio. We would be happy to talk to you directly about search, or perhaps work with a local bar association. Please feel free to contact me directly for more info. Damian Porcari
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent-public-search-tool-a#comment-1660143015473
Re: Patent Public Search tool β a streamlined way to search all U.S. published patent applications
Frank H Foster
2022-08-10T10:50:15-04:00
2022-08-10T10:50:15-04:00
Patent Public Search looks like it could be very valuable but certainly is not user friendly or intuitive in the absence of training. The Director's blog says that you are holding webinars but I saw none on the Events page which goes to December 1. The available materials look nice but are quite inadequate. When will a training webinar be available? The sooner the better.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/safeguarding-the-trademark-community-against#comment-1659638127145
Re: Safeguarding the trademark community against fraud with identity verification
Kim Oren
2022-08-04T14:35:27-04:00
2022-08-04T14:35:27-04:00
I received notification that I now need to verify my identity for my business (Clear Case Grants). Is that correct? I'm having trouble understanding whether or not I need to take action and, if so, what and how.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/secretary-of-commerce-gina-raimondo#comment-1659195491614
Re: Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo and the USPTOβs Council for Inclusive Innovation expand innovation to promote jobs and U.S. prosperity
Anon
2022-07-30T11:38:11-04:00
2022-07-30T11:38:11-04:00
"We must encourage Americans who have not traditionally participated in our innovation ecosystem to pursue STEM innovation education and careers, to patent their ideas, trademark their brands, seek investments to grow their enterprises, and engage in emerging new sectors of the economy that need their unique insights and perspectives." How can they possibly do that when there are 'astronomical costs' involved? People don't even have enough money to buy food & medicine now, or be able to afford a house or apartment - much less have $15K-$30K to spend TRYING TO GET A SINGLE patent that may be completely worthless, later found to be entirely invalid, or far too 'weak' & 'narrow' to provide any 'real' IP RIGHTS at all! Not to even mention the absolutely ABSURD & 'ruinous costs' of ever trying to 'enforce' those supposed IP rights (b/c the government won't)! How can a young person with student debt or 99% of Americans even 'think about' innovation, inventing & patents? They're NOT STUPID!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-biden-administration-is-acting#comment-1658723746999
Re: The Biden Administration is acting to promote competition and lower drug prices for all Americans
History Assignment Help Service
2022-07-25T00:35:46-04:00
2022-07-25T00:35:46-04:00
With inflation running high it's important for the government to provide some support and ensure Americans remain in the best position economically. The Biden Administration has shown good signs in this regard.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/celebrating-lgbtq-inventors-and-entrepreneurs#comment-1658615324540
Re: Celebrating LGBTQ+ Inventors and Entrepreneurs
PK
2022-07-23T18:28:44-04:00
2022-07-23T18:28:44-04:00
This is so heart-warming to see brilliant minds from all sections of society collectively coming together for the greater good. Thank you for sharing these powerful and inspiring stories!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-the-management-of-patent#comment-1658487415079
Re: Modernizing the management of patent applications with Patent Center
USPTO
2022-07-22T06:56:55-04:00
2022-07-22T06:56:55-04:00
Thank you for your feedback! We are always looking for potential improvements to Patent Center, including greater accessibility on mobile devices. Patent Center functions on many mobile devices. The screen view may be dependent on the resolution of your device, and rotating it to a landscape view may help you better view the content. We will continue to work to optimize Patent Center for the mobile experience.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/incentivizing-and-protecting-innovation-in#comment-1658484057492
Re: Incentivizing and protecting innovation in artificial intelligence and emerging technologies
Inventor
2022-07-22T06:00:57-04:00
2022-07-22T06:00:57-04:00
Would the PTO & lawyers who depend on the current application process, remaining extremely complex, unpredictable and often inconsistent (so that 'ordinary humans' will NEVER comprehend how the system works), be worried IF computers & AI could one day replace them? Would they be worried if the cost to obtain & 'defend' a patent could go WAY down to a small fraction of what it is now? Currently each application costs a small fortune (that 99.99% of Americans CAN'T AFFORD to spend, especially if at the end of this 'astronomically expensive' and 'extremely long' process, they are simply denied a patent for their innovative work or are issued a 'worthless' patent that just causes more problems & wastes even more money (that could be much better spent). Shouldn't the goal of the USPTO be to make patent examination high quality, fast and 'cheap'? AI could do that!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/incentivizing-and-protecting-innovation-in#comment-1658344909814
Re: Incentivizing and protecting innovation in artificial intelligence and emerging technologies
Inventor
2022-07-20T15:21:49-04:00
2022-07-20T15:21:49-04:00
Will AI be used to help make examination 'suggestions' to often 'inconsistent' & sometimes 'unfair' examiners & judges? After all there's not much humans can do that computers can't, at least, get very close to doing well. They can even play 'Go' like a master (something thought impossible for a long time)!
Patent allowance is supposed to be based solely on 'facts', 'logic', 'prior decisions', 'objectivity', 'consistency' & 'fairness' (no favorites). Computers can easily handle ALL those things, especially since they 'won't care' who the applicant's are, how well connected they may be, how large an entity they represent, or how a 'rookie' typically examines them (& then promptly denies them as instructed). They also won't care about the economic consequences of issuing even a 'broad patent'. They will be totally neutral when it comes to consequences & economics.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-the-management-of-patent#comment-1657909650055
Re: Modernizing the management of patent applications with Patent Center
James Howard Carmichael
2022-07-15T14:27:30-04:00
2022-07-15T14:27:30-04:00
As a Micro Entity we are impacted in a major way by the long time before a patent reaches Office Action.
For us, the business opportunity may very well have passed by the time Office Action is even initiated. WE NEED FASTER ACTION! What opportunities are there?
The related concern is Commercialization. There seem to be no avenues that do more than discuss this. Establishing contacts to the appropriate industry organizations usually is virtually impossible. What can be done to help us?? I search for "Open Innovation" but find very few organizations that are truly Open to Outside Innovation. What programs open doors for us?
Jim Carmichael
The Carmichael Group, LLC
james@carmichaelgroup.com.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/safeguarding-the-trademark-community-against#comment-1657898759433
Re: Safeguarding the trademark community against fraud with identity verification
Bruce Margulies
2022-07-15T11:25:59-04:00
2022-07-15T11:25:59-04:00
"Further, we will soon be issuing a Federal Register Notice that provides additional clarity and context on the user roles required to verify filers’ identities and help maintain a seamless verification process."
If your Notice is available can you please email me a link?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657895248131
Re: The search for lost X-patents
EnviroTechnical Imaging
2022-07-15T10:27:28-04:00
2022-07-15T10:27:28-04:00
Commending you for a well-written article. Your team is assembling the right details to build robust metadata. I’ve seen G—gle Patents reduce the list of a U.S. inventor’s registered patents shown online from over 60 to now 36 since 2003. I combed old patent registries and archives to find several missing patent numbers. I screen-saved Milon J. Trumble’s patents online since 2003. His breadth of registered patents publicly visible became diminished for hydrocarbons inventions. This reduction in publicly visible patents narrowed the broad scope of his early registered work. His patents covered asphalt manufacturing to solid fuel, and then into oil cracking for high octane aviation fuels. More robust USPTO metadata will reveal the strategic path taken by this inventor named MJ Trumble to become the first American to register his patents in every country of the world in 1916. www.envirotechnicalimaging.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657746309168
Re: The search for lost X-patents
Russ Allen
2022-07-13T17:05:09-04:00
2022-07-13T17:05:09-04:00
Adam, thanks for writing about this. I found eight X patents on USPat that aren't in patft or ppubs! Now I know who to contact :-)
On the same subject, look for commenter Barbara Hampton's article "Stalking the Wild X Patent".
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657738372103
Re: The search for lost X-patents
Joel R. Havens
2022-07-13T14:52:52-04:00
2022-07-13T14:52:52-04:00
We have been listing early (pre July 1836) U. S. patents at Datamp.org. So far here is what we have found:
FX Fractional X Patents 90
NX Early Patents that do not have numbers 85
RX Reissued X Patents 38
X X patents 9755
The two best sources for lists of early patents are:
"A Digest of Patents, Issued by the United States, from 1790 to January 1, 1839", published in 1840
"A List of Patents Issued by the United States, from 1790 to 1847", published in 1847
These books, in PDF form, are available in the U. S. at Google Books
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657720379710
Re: The search for lost X-patents
Barbara J Hampton
2022-07-13T09:52:59-04:00
2022-07-13T09:52:59-04:00
Thank you, Dr. Bisno, for expanding the search for the lost X-Patents via the USPTO's online platform, a vital connection for researchers around the world. There remains much to be learned about American innovators and their ideas, both as history and as inspiration and guidance for the future of IP.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657712022964
Re: The search for lost X-patents
Thomas H. Jackson
2022-07-13T07:33:42-04:00
2022-07-13T07:33:42-04:00
I have an original patent signed by John Quincy Adams that may be one of the lost X-patents. Let me know if I can help the USPTO restore this at least one patent. The specification was given to my secretary to transcribe but may have been lost. The drawings and patent are framed. I will contact my former assistant to see if she still may have it. I recall the title as a copper-plated printing press with original drawings. I traded it for one signed by Andrew Jackson, who was a dealer in old documents. I do not know what happened to the Andrew Jackson patent or anything about its disclosure.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657707087822
Re: The search for lost X-patents
Chris Baker
2022-07-13T06:11:27-04:00
2022-07-13T06:11:27-04:00
Adam, Great job. Well written, easy to follow and excellent recap of historical events. Very nice!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-search-for-lost-x#comment-1657702289130
Re: The search for lost X-patents
Yolande Athaide
2022-07-13T04:51:29-04:00
2022-07-13T04:51:29-04:00
This is a fascinating history of the fire, the lost patents and ongoing recovery efforts!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-the-management-of-patent#comment-1657629684592
Re: Modernizing the management of patent applications with Patent Center
Eugene M Lee
2022-07-12T08:41:24-04:00
2022-07-12T08:41:24-04:00
Could both Public PAIR and Patent Center be made available in parallel so that mobile users can use Public PAIR and computer users have a choice between the two, i.e., two UIs for the same data until Patent Center is as functional as Public PAIR with the same if not better speed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-the-management-of-patent#comment-1657625951913
Re: Modernizing the management of patent applications with Patent Center
AH
2022-07-12T07:39:11-04:00
2022-07-12T07:39:11-04:00
It’s unfortunate that Patent Center doesn’t work on mobile devices like the iPhone. Public pair does. Patent center is better on the computer but until the mobile functionality is created this is a step backwards.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-biden-administration-is-acting#comment-1657616368894
Re: The Biden Administration is acting to promote competition and lower drug prices for all Americans
Online Marketing Company in Edmonton
2022-07-12T04:59:28-04:00
2022-07-12T04:59:28-04:00
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that reducing the pharmaceutical industry’s revenues would result in two fewer drugs in the next decade, 23 fewer in the following decade, and 34 fewer drugs in the third decade. Predictions 20 to 30 years out are necessarily imprecise, but in any case, many of those projected new therapies would likely be neither novel nor more valuable than existing drugs. That is, they wouldn’t be innovative.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/just-getting-started#comment-1657581651094
Re: Just getting started
Isaac Robertson
2022-07-11T19:20:51-04:00
2022-07-11T19:20:51-04:00
Thank you for this blog update, director. I appreciate the time you took to update us on the happenings at the USPTO. I am always pleased to hear about the advances being made in intellectual property protection and the continued efforts to streamline the patent process. I know that the USPTO is constantly working to improve the quality of its products and services, and I am grateful for the dedication of its employees. keep up the good work! Thank you again for this update.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-biden-administration-is-acting#comment-1657438996283
Re: The Biden Administration is acting to promote competition and lower drug prices for all Americans
Desus
2022-07-10T03:43:16-04:00
2022-07-10T03:43:16-04:00
The foundations of these laws were written into the U.S. Constitution
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-pro-bono-program-helping#comment-1656681704411
Re: PTAB Pro Bono Program: Helping inventors obtain legal counsel for PTAB proceedings
Scholarships
2022-07-01T09:21:44-04:00
2022-07-01T09:21:44-04:00
This is an awesome opportunity to the PTAB
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/incentivizing-and-protecting-innovation-in#comment-1655103363974
Re: Incentivizing and protecting innovation in artificial intelligence and emerging technologies
Prithvi Mamidala
2022-06-13T02:56:03-04:00
2022-06-13T02:56:03-04:00
Interesting post.
Regulators have to step up with regards to artificial intelligence. This technology could have far-reaching consequences and it is important that it leads to no abuse in our society.
But I would like to ask a question.
Earlier today, I saw an article in The Guardian about a software engineer who claimed that one of Google's AI projects was sentient.
Now, the engineer shared a transcript of a conversation it had with the AI software and claimed that Google might view the transcripts as proprietary property.
Is this true? Wouldn't only the software itself be protected by IP laws and not it's input or output? Can Google actually take successful legal action against the engineer?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/visit-the-reopened-national-inventors#comment-1654777762300
Re: Visit the reopened National Inventors Hall of Fame Museum
Britt Magneson
2022-06-09T08:29:22-04:00
2022-06-09T08:29:22-04:00
What a wonderful blog and endorsement of our Invention Education programming!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/incentivizing-and-protecting-innovation-in#comment-1654573471472
Re: Incentivizing and protecting innovation in artificial intelligence and emerging technologies
olfa kraiem
2022-06-06T23:44:31-04:00
2022-06-06T23:44:31-04:00
will AI change our life to the best?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/three-upcoming-events-for-inventors#comment-1654537930504
Re: Three upcoming events for inventors and entrepreneurs you wonβt want to miss
Diana E
2022-06-06T13:52:10-04:00
2022-06-06T13:52:10-04:00
I had the chance to briefly meet Suma Reddy a couple of years ago. To me, she was one of the most brilliant people I've ever met, even though I could only listen to her for just a few minutes. How exactly could I attend Proud Innovation? Thanks for your help!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/doing-our-part-to-mitigate#comment-1654265424506
Re: Doing our part to mitigate climate change: fast-tracking green innovations
William L. Robinson, Jr.
2022-06-03T10:10:24-04:00
2022-06-03T10:10:24-04:00
We have developed air filtration media that will trap and retain CO2 helping to mitigate climate change!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/just-getting-started#comment-1653659335479
Re: Just getting started
Tara Chand
2022-05-27T09:48:55-04:00
2022-05-27T09:48:55-04:00
I am in the process of drafting a detailed letter to Director Vidal, how and why the USPTO she now heads is totally corrupt and broken system and what to do to correct and fix it.
I had filed a detailed memoranda on what is broken at USPTO ( characterized as horror stories) and how to fix, first when USPTO had requsted comments based on US Senator Request on 35 USC 101 jurisprudence and I do not trust USPTO to bring that to her attention.
I sincerely hope that she has the wisdom, intelligence and common sense to correct and fix and not a mere political appointee biding her time until the next administration.
Best
Tara Chand Esq., BSEE(IITD), MSSE, CISSP
founder & CEO
Internet Promise Group Inc.
310 787 1400
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/just-getting-started#comment-1653533926912
Re: Just getting started
Joe Lee
2022-05-25T22:58:46-04:00
2022-05-25T22:58:46-04:00
DOCX is a rather inappropriate file format to use for filing official documents. This subjects us to the highly unethical vendor-lock-in practices of Microsoft. Please consider using the ISO/IEC international standard ISO/IEC 26300 OpenDocument format (ODT) instead.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/just-getting-started#comment-1653518203871
Re: Just getting started
George
2022-05-25T18:36:43-04:00
2022-05-25T18:36:43-04:00
Do members of Congress know that the USPTO has now implemented a BLANKET DENIAL of all 'broad' patent applications & requires them to be made very narrow? Do they know who first establish and implemented these 'restrictive patent allowance policies' (such as SAWS)?
Do they know how many inventors may have been 'intentionally prevented' from getting the broad patents they deserved under the Constitution and original patent law, or whose patents may have been 'sabotaged' or 'so cleverly limited' by Examiners, as to be legally worthless upon issuance (without the applicant even knowing it)? Could this number be in the 1000's? 10,000's even?
Is this something that should be looked by the courts now, especially the SCOTUS? Can the USPTO defend itself against all such charges of 'patent sabotage' and/or denial? What if they can't? Who will compensate the affected inventors who may be entitled to millions or even billions of dollars?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-creates-new-programs-to#comment-1643107400255
Re: USPTO creates new programs to provide economic relief during the pandemic
Cassandra Provencher
2022-01-25T05:43:20-05:00
2022-01-25T05:43:20-05:00
When these classes come up for the new program being launched this spring- could you reach out so I can attend.
Thank you!
Cassandra
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1641711105773
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
newscutzy
2022-01-09T01:51:45-05:00
2022-01-09T01:51:45-05:00
I think this is a great idea, but I believe the $25 fee should be waived for micro-entities. Many would like to have a ribbon copy after the massive investment in obtaining a patent. If the fee is meant to encourage electronic copies, I don't think the USPTO will have an issue as most large entities will prefer electronic copies.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1641590989320
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
April Torres
2022-01-07T16:29:49-05:00
2022-01-07T16:29:49-05:00
I think this is a very progressive move in the right direction in regards to helping the planet. Our clients if wanting can still get ribbon copies but most really only want digital. And with that when we receive ribbon copies that clients do not want to store we are storing them instead.
I believe as long as the digital ribbon copy can be locked without allowing any malice edits, this is a superb idea.
Thank you...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1641553262479
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Pets Helps
2022-01-07T06:01:02-05:00
2022-01-07T06:01:02-05:00
I figure this would be an incredible improvement. It would be considerably more harmless to the ecosystem - not exclusively would the USPTO not be mailing printed copies, yet in addition law offices like our own would not have to advance them on via mail to our customers. I like the possibility that show duplicates will in any case be accessible for an expense, since we in all actuality do have a few customers who truly like getting the strip duplicate. However, generally I imagine that applicants will be totally happy with an advanced version.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1641553116478
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
Pets Helps Animal Guides Blog
2022-01-07T05:58:36-05:00
2022-01-07T05:58:36-05:00
Logos, brand names, inventions, designs, and customer data can all be valuable business assets. Owners of trademarks might wish to rethink their portfolios. The owner ought to consider documenting a new application for enlistments that are over three years of age and incorporate products and administrations for which an imprint has not been used. When guiding trademark owners on declaring use in a government trademark application, specialists ought to be cautious.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1641530646127
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
Lio
2022-01-06T23:44:06-05:00
2022-01-06T23:44:06-05:00
This actually sounds a bit promising but can someone please tell me how this would impact already existing trademarks or even new ones?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1641458250648
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Ajay Prajapat
2022-01-06T03:37:30-05:00
2022-01-06T03:37:30-05:00
This is a step in the right direction.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1641362212011
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
David Marton
2022-01-05T00:56:52-05:00
2022-01-05T00:56:52-05:00
I think it is a great step for trademark owners, Many wholesale businesses are suffering from trademark issues. Some wholesale businesses shut down due to unregistered trademarks.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1641273168104
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
kronologibayu
2022-01-04T00:12:48-05:00
2022-01-04T00:12:48-05:00
Great article, I have found a new insight through this post. Electronic patent and trademark issuance is a must.
Thanks you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1641244426939
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
Winter Olympics Live Stream
2022-01-03T16:13:46-05:00
2022-01-03T16:13:46-05:00
This is very important for all business people as trademark issues. It's a good thing making changes in the act.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1640924287333
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
newscutzy
2021-12-30T23:18:07-05:00
2021-12-30T23:18:07-05:00
I am writing to let you know about was a wonderful experience our daughter had while reading your blog. She also learned many facts, like what it feels to have a remarkable helping hand that lets many people understand complicated subjects. Your work was definitely more than my expectations. Thank you for sharing these practical, healthy insightful and innovative ideas on this subject to Julie.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1640877142363
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
Damaris
2021-12-30T10:12:22-05:00
2021-12-30T10:12:22-05:00
This actually sounds a bit promising but can someone please tell me how this would impact already existing trademarks or even new ones?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1640837882940
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
chrome extensions Trademark
2021-12-29T23:18:02-05:00
2021-12-29T23:18:02-05:00
This decision is long overdue, and I commend it. I concur with the other statements that the United States is one of the last countries to use electronic certificates. This will save the USPTO and our firms significant amounts of money on postage.
This is an excellent idea; however, I believe the $25 fee should be waived for microentities. Many would prefer to receive a ribbon copy following the substantial expense required to obtain a patent. If the fee is intended to promote electronic copies, I believe the USPTO will have no objections, as the majority of large entities will choose electronic copies.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1640407771051
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
ARI Mond
2021-12-24T23:49:31-05:00
2021-12-24T23:49:31-05:00
I applaud this decision and it's long overdue. I echo the other comments that the U.S. is one of the last countries to switch to electronic certs. This will save the USPTO a fortune in postage and us firms too.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-trademark-modernization-act-implementing#comment-1640242426730
Re: The Trademark Modernization Act: Implementing changes to protect brand owners
Aliciaowens12
2021-12-23T01:53:46-05:00
2021-12-23T01:53:46-05:00
While the legislation provides a framework for legal trademark owners to contest fraudulently obtained applications and registrations, these methods can pose substantial problems to the registrations' sustainability. Owners of trademarks may wish to re-evaluate their portfolios. The owner should consider filing a fresh application for registrations that are more than three years old and encompass products and services for which a mark has not been utilized. When counseling trademark owners on asserting use in a federal trademark application, practitioners should be cautious.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1640108854094
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
ICJobs
2021-12-21T12:47:34-05:00
2021-12-21T12:47:34-05:00
This is a step in the right direction. In this age of science and technology, electronic patent and trademark issuance is a must.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1640091459738
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
USPTO
2021-12-21T07:57:39-05:00
2021-12-21T07:57:39-05:00
Thank you all for your input on these proposed changes. We invite you to provide any additional feedback on the electronic issuance of trademark registrations by emailing TMFRNotices@uspto.gov with the subject line “Electronic Registration Certificates,” or on the electronic issuance of patents by submitting a formal comment on the notice of public rulemaking, linked to above, by February 14, 2022. As always, we will review and consider all comments and appreciate hearing from you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639991178461
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Jenifer Lake
2021-12-20T04:06:18-05:00
2021-12-20T04:06:18-05:00
This is a great idea, however, I think the $25 should be waived for at least microentities. Many would like to have a ribbon copy after the massive investment in obtaining a patent. If the fee is meant to encourage electronic copies, I don't think the USPTO will have an issue as most large entities will prefer electronic copies.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639709941482
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Khai Kwan
2021-12-16T21:59:01-05:00
2021-12-16T21:59:01-05:00
Great idea preferably on a blockchain too so information is immutable. I have designed a similar for Patent Licensing by issuing as NFT so that Patentee can issue NFT (license for their patents) to those who wants to practise their invention. I hope the Director would encourage this and make this as a feature in part of this digital patent or trademark. Ie whenever someone check on this digital patent/trademark, there is a button allowing one to license it (if turn on by the patentee).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639698128490
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
nfbdpvt
2021-12-16T18:42:08-05:00
2021-12-16T18:42:08-05:00
Effective plan, Electronic certificates will make my life so better
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639681666904
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
NJTrademark
2021-12-16T14:07:46-05:00
2021-12-16T14:07:46-05:00
Very good all in all. This year, some of my certificates ended up in Kansas City and were FedExed to me by a kind, fellow practitioner. This would have prevented that accident from happening.
That said, I am curious to hear if all email addresses of record would get the notice of the electronic trademark certificate. In other words, would our clients receive it before we have time to report it?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639657578932
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Amy watch TV
2021-12-16T07:26:18-05:00
2021-12-16T07:26:18-05:00
I also support this program, particularly as it relates to large entities. It appears that issue fees will not be decreasing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639457440455
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Oscar Weber
2021-12-13T23:50:40-05:00
2021-12-13T23:50:40-05:00
Good decision, it would be an excellent news for trademark owner as they will have their registration certificate sooner, also it is good news for the environment as we will be printing less paper.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639392850881
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Donna Johns
2021-12-13T05:54:10-05:00
2021-12-13T05:54:10-05:00
How many ribbon copies can be purchased? Does it (they) have to be paid for at a specific time or can it be purchased later?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639392246744
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
steve
2021-12-13T05:44:06-05:00
2021-12-13T05:44:06-05:00
This makes sense, certainly for companies that receive numerous patents per year. But as a small entity with only a few patents in process, I'd definitely want the presentation copy. So I hope that the $25 isn't an upcharge on top of the existing issuance fee.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639386104359
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Delwar
2021-12-13T04:01:44-05:00
2021-12-13T04:01:44-05:00
This is a very good decision. Electronic issuance of patents and trademark is a mandatory thing in this era of science and technology. Thanks a lot.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639331953309
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Karen Boardman
2021-12-12T12:59:13-05:00
2021-12-12T12:59:13-05:00
As a trademark attorney for small business clients, many of my clients would prefer to have a certificate with a gold seal for display purposes. If the application fee is not being reduced (even though the customer is receiving fewer services), it should be far less than $25 to obtain an optional certificate, since the current system is clearly not spending that amount on a per-certificate basis to print and mail.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639318476074
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Super Bowl Now
2021-12-12T09:14:36-05:00
2021-12-12T09:14:36-05:00
While no similar amendment to the trademark rules is necessary, I believe it is important for the public to have the chance to give their feedback.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639227863575
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
David Gosse
2021-12-11T08:04:23-05:00
2021-12-11T08:04:23-05:00
Switching to electronic patents makes sense for many large patent applicants, who mostly don't want to be bothered with paper copies. Charging a fee for large entities who want a paper copy may also make sense. But micro entities and small entities often view their patents quite differently. A ribbon copy patent is the most tangible output of a very expensive and time-consuming process. In my experience, micro and small entities are the applicants most likely to want a ribbon copy of their issued patent and least needing to be dissuaded by additional fees at the USPTO. In particular, it's a bit absurd to charge micro-entities an additional $25 fee for the ribbon copy of their patent after the massive investment they've already expended to apply for that patent in the first place.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639224929053
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
IR
2021-12-11T07:15:29-05:00
2021-12-11T07:15:29-05:00
About time!
Paper production, distribution, use and disposal require a large amount of energy and raw materials. It would help to reduce paper waste and pollution. Also, it will reduce additional expenses to owners for mailing the documents.
If someone needs to prove original ownership they can request a certification service from the USPTO and provide a certified copy with a seal as necessary. Perhaps this also can be arranged through electronic verification.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639207229834
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Piromax
2021-12-11T02:20:29-05:00
2021-12-11T02:20:29-05:00
Good news. The process of receiving will be facilitated. It is good that you saved the paper "presentation copy" and the tape version. For many, obtaining a patent is a great event and pride. How not to hang such a confession on the wall?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639168391530
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Stacey Kalamaras
2021-12-10T15:33:11-05:00
2021-12-10T15:33:11-05:00
I applaud this decision and it's long overdue. I echo the other comments that the U.S. is one of the last countries to switch to electronic certs. This will save the USPTO a fortune in postage and and us firms too.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639159921209
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Ted
2021-12-10T13:12:01-05:00
2021-12-10T13:12:01-05:00
This shift seems like a sustainable, environmentally-friendly idea that is universally desirable in most instances.
But I agree with the earlier comment that the fee for paper copies should be waivable for micro-entities and small entities. The US patent system has always had a special focus on rewarding inventors, and this caveat seems aligned with that philosophy.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639155223619
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Narek Zohrabyan
2021-12-10T11:53:43-05:00
2021-12-10T11:53:43-05:00
If PTO converts to digital certificates, then shouldn't the Applicant also get a $25 discount from paying either the patent issue fee or trademark application fee, respective to each scenario?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639143396870
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Bridget Smith
2021-12-10T08:36:36-05:00
2021-12-10T08:36:36-05:00
I fully support this program, particularly as it relates to large entities. It appears, however, that issue fees will not be decreasing. In other words, the Office will be providing fewer services for the same price and upcharging if patentees want the previous level of service. This disproportionately impacts microentities, who benefit the most from ribbon copies. I recommend that the Office waive the surcharge for microentities.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639141359558
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Mike
2021-12-10T08:02:39-05:00
2021-12-10T08:02:39-05:00
Great. Now make it a "live" document, so that a revoked, lapsed, or expired patent no longer bears indicia of being a patent.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639138226974
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
DgX
2021-12-10T07:10:26-05:00
2021-12-10T07:10:26-05:00
How does one protect the seal and signatures so they won't be stolen or hacked by those who want to issue phony certifications or otherwise use the official material for counterfeit?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639137328105
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Susan Basko
2021-12-10T06:55:28-05:00
2021-12-10T06:55:28-05:00
I like that the Trademark Office is going to digital certificates. The paper ones get crumpled or lost in the mail anyway. If $25 is being charged for a fancy copy to be mailed, maybe the Trademark Office can put it in a cardboard envelope and have Fedex or Amazon deliver it, rather than the Post Office.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639136625158
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Warren
2021-12-10T06:43:45-05:00
2021-12-10T06:43:45-05:00
Digital copies are fine, but I hope they are natively fully searchable, not just the usual pdf images. PDF patent images do not OCR correctly in Acrobat, since acrobat cannot distinguish the two column format from a single column. So it always gets the word order incorrect. (for example, when selecting OCR’d text over multiple lines in the left-hand column, the selection frequently jumps over to the right hand column inappropriately.) If you are issuing patents natively in pdf format, then you can establish the proper word order from the outset. That, in my mind, would be a very nice benefit of issuing patents electronically.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639135749990
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
James L. Young
2021-12-10T06:29:09-05:00
2021-12-10T06:29:09-05:00
Good Plan. A bit overdue - but this will simplify many things.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639135606130
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Axel Nix
2021-12-10T06:26:46-05:00
2021-12-10T06:26:46-05:00
Electronic patent certificates will make my life so much easier!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639135134815
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Meg Duffy
2021-12-10T06:18:54-05:00
2021-12-10T06:18:54-05:00
Will it be sent automatically to the emails in the application? I ask because currently registration is the only time we are NOT notified by email. The only way I know we've gotten a registration is the certificate or other alerts I have set up. Everything else comes through.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639133378626
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
UFC Fan
2021-12-10T05:49:38-05:00
2021-12-10T05:49:38-05:00
Sure thing, but keeping Physical CDs or paper works also mandatory I think.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639133092069
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Celia Leber
2021-12-10T05:44:52-05:00
2021-12-10T05:44:52-05:00
I think this would be a great improvement. It would be much more environmentally friendly -- not only would the USPTO not be mailing hard copies, but also law firms like ours would not need to forward them on by mail to our clients. I like the idea that presentation copies will still be available for a fee, since we do have some clients who really like receiving the ribbon copy. But for the most part I think that applicants will be perfectly happy with a digital version.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639132898561
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
NFRstream
2021-12-10T05:41:38-05:00
2021-12-10T05:41:38-05:00
This is a very good decision. Electronic issuance of patents and trademark is a mandatory thing in this era of science and technology. Thanks a lot.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639132828189
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Emily Chilson
2021-12-10T05:40:28-05:00
2021-12-10T05:40:28-05:00
I am very excited for this. Can there also be a way to get electronic certified copies of patent applications emailed or available via Private PAIR? Physical CDs are obsolete.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-how-we-issue-patents#comment-1639132483170
Re: Modernizing how we issue patents and trademark registrations
Jeanine M Ortt
2021-12-10T05:34:43-05:00
2021-12-10T05:34:43-05:00
I am fully on board with electronic TM registration certificates. In fact, the US is one of the last to make the transition.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1636250300213
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Lina
2021-11-06T21:58:20-04:00
2021-11-06T21:58:20-04:00
@cashappfix, I think an application is considered a micro-entity if the applicant and inventors have gross yearly incomes that are less than three times the previous year's median family income.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1635222013830
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
cashappfix
2021-10-26T00:20:13-04:00
2021-10-26T00:20:13-04:00
Can someone please explain me this "A micro entity must meet the criteria of a small entity"???
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1635221340881
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Trimmereo
2021-10-26T00:09:00-04:00
2021-10-26T00:09:00-04:00
Thanks for aiming to protect all patent applicants, including legitimate micro entity applicants and small businesses, and to prevent abuse of the patent system.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1634887178322
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
JAMB Result Checker
2021-10-22T03:19:38-04:00
2021-10-22T03:19:38-04:00
In response to Jerome's question, would all five micro-entity applications be deemed small entities when the fifth was filed, requiring them to alter their statuses and pay small entity costs for the remainder of the prosecution?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1634619982268
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Jamb
2021-10-19T01:06:22-04:00
2021-10-19T01:06:22-04:00
This effort is clearly well-intended. Unfortunately, when the USPTO erroneously flags a valid micro entity claim as erroneous, the cost of a qualified practitioner's time to respond is a large portion of the savings in USPTO fees from claiming micro entity status.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-s-comprehensive-strategy-to#comment-1634042250965
Re: USPTOβs comprehensive strategy to fight trademark fraud
Codingface Team
2021-10-12T08:37:30-04:00
2021-10-12T08:37:30-04:00
This is a great step forward against fraud. This will help reputed companies to grab their own trademarks strongly and efficiently.
It will decrease suspicious submissions ranging from inaccurate to fraudulent.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1633654066174
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
spider killer
2021-10-07T20:47:46-04:00
2021-10-07T20:47:46-04:00
It practically forces me to become the accountant and reviewer of tax returns. This is not good. (3) You would do well to state clear, hard and fast rules, such as how much evidence must the patent attorney review? At least for the senior status program you require that I keep proof of age in my file. What is the safe harbor for Micro Entity? When do I know I have done right by my client and not let him slip through, since you are now examining these issues? Thanks for considering these points.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1633654011439
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
best lawn
2021-10-07T20:46:51-04:00
2021-10-07T20:46:51-04:00
Applicants who mistakenly claimed micro entity status will be able to make a fee deficiency payment and proceed through the application process in a non-micro entity status. Those who cannot provide information to support their micro entity status, and who do not make a fee deficiency payment, run the risk of their application being abandoned. We will continue to communicate with our customers and the public to ensure the requirements on how to file a patent application as a small and micro entity are clear.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1633653941730
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
bikeion.com
2021-10-07T20:45:41-04:00
2021-10-07T20:45:41-04:00
I feel I must kick them up to Small Entity. (2) "Gross Income" is not an entry on IRS1040. It leaves the inventor to grope with accounting issues, where they may be awash. Even CPAs ask what I want. It practically forces me to become the accountant and reviewer of tax returns. This is not good. (3) You would do well to state clear, hard and fast rules, such as how much evidence must the patent attorney review? At least for the senior status program you require that I keep proof of age in my file. What is the safe harbor for Micro Entity? When do I know I have done right by my client and not let him slip through, since you are now examining these issues? Thanks for considering these points.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1633492580124
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Danny
2021-10-05T23:56:20-04:00
2021-10-05T23:56:20-04:00
This effort is clearly well-intended. Unfortunately, when the USPTO erroneously flags a valid micro entity claim as erroneous, the cost of a qualified practitioner's time to respond is a large portion of the savings in USPTO fees from claiming micro entity status.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1633492518600
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Recruitment
2021-10-05T23:55:18-04:00
2021-10-05T23:55:18-04:00
One area of confusion is the "no more than four previously-filed applications." This is literally true when the fifth application is filed, so it follows that micro entity certification is appropriate at filing. But then for any subsequent fees in the fifth application (excess claims fees or extension of time fees during prosecution or issue fees) would then have to be paid at the small entity rate as of course would be in the sixth or later application naming the same inventor.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1633251936205
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
jasa makalah
2021-10-03T05:05:36-04:00
2021-10-03T05:05:36-04:00
One area of confusion is the "no more than four previously-filed applications.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1633230548012
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Love
2021-10-02T23:09:08-04:00
2021-10-02T23:09:08-04:00
It will definitely going to help small firms, and protect them.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1632981761199
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
SRK Jaiswal
2021-09-30T02:02:41-04:00
2021-09-30T02:02:41-04:00
I think it's good, There are a couple of rough spots in the Micro Entity process. (1) Some inventors are understandably unwilling to discuss gross income, even tho I (patent attorney) make it clear I just want a "yes" or "no" answer to the questions. Then, even tho I am confident they are entitled to Micro Entity, I feel I must kick them up to Small Entity. (2) "Gross Income" is not an entry on IRS1040. It leaves the inventor to grope with accounting issues, where they may be awash. Even CPAs ask what I want. It practically forces me to become the accountant and reviewer of tax returns. This is not good. (3) You would do well to state clear, hard and fast rules, such as how much evidence must the patent attorney review? At least for the senior status program you require that I keep proof of age in my file. What is the safe harbor for Micro Entity? When do I know I have done right by my client and not let him slip through, since you are now examining these issues? Thanks for considering these points.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1632364684924
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
AOL com login
2021-09-22T22:38:04-04:00
2021-09-22T22:38:04-04:00
This is a great step forward and long overdue to protect consumers - isn't that one of the original purposes of trademark protection. That's steps are needed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1632160958410
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
E
2021-09-20T14:02:38-04:00
2021-09-20T14:02:38-04:00
Further to Jeromye's comment--after filing the 5th micro entity application, would all 5 applications then be considered as small entity and therefore be required to update their statuses and pay small entity fees for the rest of prosecution?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1632084173977
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
ABC
2021-09-19T16:42:53-04:00
2021-09-19T16:42:53-04:00
This effort is clearly well-intended. Unfortunately, when the USPTO erroneously flags a valid micro entity claim as erroneous, the cost of a qualified practitioner's time to respond is a large portion of the savings in USPTO fees from claiming micro entity status.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1631116343708
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Kyle W. Rost
2021-09-08T11:52:23-04:00
2021-09-08T11:52:23-04:00
There are a couple of rough spots in the Micro Entity process. (1) Some inventors are understandably unwilling to discuss gross income, even tho I (patent attorney) make it clear I just want a "yes" or "no" answer to the questions. Then, even tho I am confident they are entitled to Micro Entity, I feel I must kick them up to Small Entity. (2) "Gross Income" is not an entry on IRS1040. It leaves the inventor to grope with accounting issues, where they may be awash. Even CPAs ask what I want. It practically forces me to become the accountant and reviewer of tax returns. This is not good. (3) You would do well to state clear, hard and fast rules, such as how much evidence must the patent attorney review? At least for the senior status program you require that I keep proof of age in my file. What is the safe harbor for Micro Entity? When do I know I have done right by my client and not let him slip through, since you are now examining these issues? Thanks for considering these points.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ensuring-the-validity-of-micro#comment-1631115517550
Re: Ensuring the validity of micro entity certifications β which provide reduced fees to eligible inventors and small businesses
Jeromye Sartain
2021-09-08T11:38:37-04:00
2021-09-08T11:38:37-04:00
One area of confusion is the "no more than four previously-filed applications." This is literally true when the fifth application is filed, so it follows that micro entity certification is appropriate at filing. But then for any subsequent fees in the fifth application (excess claims fees or extension of time fees during prosecution or issue fees) would then have to be paid at the small entity rate as of course would be in the sixth or later application naming the same inventor.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1630620449222
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
JOE
2021-09-02T18:07:29-04:00
2021-09-02T18:07:29-04:00
isn't that one of the original purposes of trademark protection? I started warning clients a year ahead of their maintenance window - then the scammers starting sending misleading messages 2 years before the windows were open. Aggressive steps are needed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1630620414884
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
UME
2021-09-02T18:06:54-04:00
2021-09-02T18:06:54-04:00
This is great news. I hope that there will be substantial enforcement behind the new registrations.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-s-comprehensive-strategy-to#comment-1630301127095
Re: USPTOβs comprehensive strategy to fight trademark fraud
Techsevi
2021-08-30T01:25:27-04:00
2021-08-30T01:25:27-04:00
This is a serious issue. Intellectual property law, International copyright law and trademark laws are not enough to stop the patent/copyright work theft. These laws should be improved.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1629888826934
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Download iphone apps
2021-08-25T06:53:46-04:00
2021-08-25T06:53:46-04:00
This is a great step forward and long overdue. I have made it a practice to alert clients of these scams and never to respond without first talking to counsel. Finally taking some pretty basic steps to protect consumers
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1629679920428
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
SANJEEV KUMAR
2021-08-22T20:52:00-04:00
2021-08-22T20:52:00-04:00
This is a great step forward and long overdue. I have made it a practice to alert clients of these scams and never to respond without first talking to counsel. Finally taking some pretty basic steps to protect consumers - isn't that one of the original purposes of trademark protection ?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-s-comprehensive-strategy-to#comment-1629315091674
Re: USPTOβs comprehensive strategy to fight trademark fraud
Walter Wilson
2021-08-18T15:31:31-04:00
2021-08-18T15:31:31-04:00
I'm pleased the USPTO recognized an increase in suspicious trademark submissions ranging from inaccurate to fraudulent. Also, that the Department of Commerce’s Office of Inspector General, found that they need to enhance controls aimed at combatting such increases in suspicious filings.
In 1984 my inventions, The Baby On Board Sign was stolen by Michael I. Lerner while he was working on my behalf at America Idea Management & via his company Safety First. He registered, patented, trademark etc. my invention in his name instead of mine, made 100's of millions dollars. See you in court Michael I. Lerner. I need a great lawyer, otherwise I will represent myself!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-s-comprehensive-strategy-to#comment-1629304621105
Re: USPTOβs comprehensive strategy to fight trademark fraud
Edward C. Knox Jr.
2021-08-18T12:37:01-04:00
2021-08-18T12:37:01-04:00
My service mark name was hi-jacked by godaddy, Inc. Can you help me take action to hold them accountable?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1628616517113
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Abhishek dhruw
2021-08-10T13:28:37-04:00
2021-08-10T13:28:37-04:00
This is great news. I hope that there will be substantial enforcement behind the new registrations.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1628603627184
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Kenneth Kunkle
2021-08-10T09:53:47-04:00
2021-08-10T09:53:47-04:00
Finally taking some pretty basic steps to protect consumers - isn't that one of the original purposes of trademark protection? I started warning clients a year ahead of their maintenance window - then the scammers starting sending misleading messages 2 years before the windows were open. Aggressive steps are needed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1628593009776
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Sarita Pickett
2021-08-10T06:56:49-04:00
2021-08-10T06:56:49-04:00
This is wonderful news.
I can honestly say that I think the only ones that would oppose it are the scammers who are trying to maliciously take advantage of small business owners and entrepreneurs that can't afford council to act as an intermediary in handling these notices.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1628297691905
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Ken Dost
2021-08-06T20:54:51-04:00
2021-08-06T20:54:51-04:00
I have not experienced what is described, but rather quite the opposite. Of greater concern to my freedom and liberty, is a registered mark, ABC® (for instance), that purposefully omits to disclose its trademarked identity to the very consumers, and society at large, to whom disclosure is materially pertinent. Truthful disclosure and representations necessary to mutual assent, which gives to consumers the knowledge upon which to make a competent and freewill decision, is instead denied. Moreover, all knowledge is purposefully concealed by false designation, as ABC (for instance), with misleading representations fostered for the believable illusion to dead paradigm. This is malicious, as the intended purpose is to move consumers and society at large into a state of ignorance. These are violations 15 U.S. Code § 1125. A couple hundred million persons are directly affected by this, tens of millions of whom have suffered irreparable harms by these deceptive trade practices/secrets.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1628222765055
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Adv. Alan Barth
2021-08-06T00:06:05-04:00
2021-08-06T00:06:05-04:00
This is a great step forward and long overdue.
I have made it a practice to alert clients of these scams and never to respond without first talking to counsel. In fact, in my experience, these scammers' charges are often well in excess of the fees many counsel charge for the same or similar services.
Thank you to those at the USPTO trademark office who pushed this initiative.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting-our-trademark-customers-with#comment-1628163305482
Re: Protecting our trademark customers with federal registration of USPTO marks
Anthony Keats
2021-08-05T07:35:05-04:00
2021-08-05T07:35:05-04:00
This is great news. I hope that there will be substantial enforcement behind the new registrations.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/help-us-find-the-next#comment-1625615963809
Re: Help us find the next National Medal of Technology and Innovation Laureates
ars art industry
2021-07-06T19:59:23-04:00
2021-07-06T19:59:23-04:00
Most likely a reason is Brand Registry on Amazon, their Accelerated IP program. Also, China based companies trademarking anything popular or common phrases to corner the market and issue takedowns later once TM is approved. This is hurting small businesses in the US! I hope you teach your examining attorneys that just slapping the phrase onto a box or packaging doesn't make it a legit brand. Majority of them are providing false specimens with any piece of jewelry for example and the mark/phrase on the packaging making it look like they are a "brand" when they are purely sold as ornamental. Many show the applied-for mark as used on the specimen of record is merely a decorative or ornamental feature of the goods and, thus, does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1625587690736
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Steven M Hoffberg
2021-07-06T12:08:10-04:00
2021-07-06T12:08:10-04:00
Why not permit the docx specification to be submitted as a missing part? Exactly why does this need to be submitted with the filing to avoid a punitive tax?
USPTO needs to provide a local server verification system fur use by the public. We need to be able to check documents while they are being drafted, and not only at the time of final upload, when there may not be time to fix the formatting.
We need senior USPTO management to show that it cares about these issues and the individuals have actually tested the system and are taking full responsibility for its failings. (See, Arthrex).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-a-huge-surge-in#comment-1624628953239
Re: What a huge surge in trademark filings means for applicants
Susan Basko
2021-06-25T09:49:13-04:00
2021-06-25T09:49:13-04:00
A lot of the trademark applications are coming from the fake trademark websites, such as the ones where the owners were all arrested in Pakistan -- which advertise on the sites as being located in San Jose, CA, and other places.https://www.worldtrademarkreview.com/governmentpolicy/uspto-urged-set-task-force-address-scams-following-massive-pakistan-fraud-case
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-a-huge-surge-in#comment-1624466408710
Re: What a huge surge in trademark filings means for applicants
Pamela
2021-06-23T12:40:08-04:00
2021-06-23T12:40:08-04:00
Most likely a reason is Brand Registry on Amazon, their Accelerated IP program. Also, China based companies trademarking anything popular or common phrases to corner the market and issue takedowns later once TM is approved. This is hurting small businesses in the US!
I hope you teach your examining attorneys that just slapping the phrase onto a box or packaging doesn't make it a legit brand. Majority of them are providing false specimens with any piece of jewelry for example and the mark/phrase on the packaging making it look like they are a "brand" when they are purely sold as ornamental. Many show the applied-for mark as used on the specimen of record is merely a decorative or ornamental feature of the goods and, thus, does not function as a trademark to indicate the source of applicant’s goods and to identify and distinguish them from others.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-a-huge-surge-in#comment-1624465511851
Re: What a huge surge in trademark filings means for applicants
julie mazzaferro
2021-06-23T12:25:11-04:00
2021-06-23T12:25:11-04:00
You should really stop allowing China to acquire all the ridiculous trademarks that you are allowing. They are generic and have been in use for a decade or more on Etsy. So how can they now claim
Them all for themselves? Maybe because this is just another way for govt to make a buck?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/what-a-huge-surge-in#comment-1624456629556
Re: What a huge surge in trademark filings means for applicants
Andrew Fortney
2021-06-23T09:57:09-04:00
2021-06-23T09:57:09-04:00
It could also be in part due to the flurry of trademark enforcement activity both in Federal courts against large numbers of online resellers and at large online retailers such as Amazon and eBay against individual online resellers. The relative ease with which such enforcement activities can be carried out may be encouraging others to do the same, as well as inspiring others to register their own rights as a way to possibly defend themselves when attacked.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1624285920856
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Franco Serafini
2021-06-21T10:32:00-04:00
2021-06-21T10:32:00-04:00
Does the DOCX requirement apply to filing U.S. national stage applications?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1623469141649
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
MD Ashraf
2021-06-11T23:39:01-04:00
2021-06-11T23:39:01-04:00
I appreciate this step taken by the USPTO.
Hope furthermore advancements to be brought up in future with further benefits.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1623462677502
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Chris King
2021-06-11T21:51:17-04:00
2021-06-11T21:51:17-04:00
Also, as of now the DOCX document is likely only going to be retained for a year, putting the burden on the applicant to find errors even before prosecution begins. (See federalregister.gov/d/2021-11256 , "After the expiration of the one-year period, the USPTO disposes of the paper..." And no, that "paper" isn't just referring to physical paper-- that also includes the DOCX.)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-hannah-wang#comment-1622668326583
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Hannah Wang, Primary Patent Examiner
Programmers
2021-06-02T17:12:06-04:00
2021-06-02T17:12:06-04:00
Hannah, you have an interesting job as Primary Patent Examiner. Congratulations! Keep up the good work for the Commerce Department's United States Patent and Trademark Office
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622527656402
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
David Scheer
2021-06-01T02:07:36-04:00
2021-06-01T02:07:36-04:00
Well, for myself, I learned a lot about Modernizing patent filing with DOCX and the various issues related to this. I hope they settle on a system that works efficiently for all concerned.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622462797013
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
MR Linux
2021-05-31T08:06:37-04:00
2021-05-31T08:06:37-04:00
I have doubts that patent applications for life sciences which include chemical structures, equations, etc. are loaded 100% correctly
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-concludes-successful-women-s#comment-1622292303215
Re: USPTO concludes successful Womenβs Entrepreneurship Symposium
Raul Gonzalez
2021-05-29T08:45:03-04:00
2021-05-29T08:45:03-04:00
This is a terrific thing. This type of symposiums are very, very productive. Some of the panelists were very knowledgeable people. congrats.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622282871596
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
2021-05-29T06:07:51-04:00
2021-05-29T06:07:51-04:00
PDFs are universal worldwide. PDF software is relatively inexpensive and simple to implement and use. Virtually every document type known to man is easily saved or printed to PDF format, thereby accommodating all users irrespective of their IT environment. DOCX, on the other hand, presents countless, FORESEEABLE issues and probable hardships, such as the many described in just a few comments made thus far. The DOCX list of "many benefits" is beyond negligible. I agree EFS could use a little tweaking, but why is it necessary to attempt fixing PDFs when they are not broken? Users will be forced to file DOCX documents then the USPTO will convert them to PDF. Wait, what???
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622140358263
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
John Heithaus
2021-05-27T14:32:38-04:00
2021-05-27T14:32:38-04:00
I understand that many of the users of EFS use windows. However, the patent office needs to take note that windows systems are not particularly secure. Patents often contain sensitive information. An entire MPEP section at 120 discusses secrecy orders. The USPTO should carefully consider whether it is in the interest of the US for a windows zero-day exploit to provide its owner with access to the systems of all patent practitioners.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622116051070
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Kevin Klughart
2021-05-27T07:47:31-04:00
2021-05-27T07:47:31-04:00
The DOCX problems noted in the comments ignore a more fundamental problem with EFS.
After using the current EFS system for some time, I must comment that the current system is really some of the worst web software I have ever used. The user interface is terrible, lacks any form of incremental file checking or correction (e.g., can't the system automatically rotate PDF drawings to the correct landscape/portrait orientation?), has terrible viewing aesthetics, and doesn't support any form of data entry history to allow reuse of prior data entries. Furthermore, the issues with DOCX are just part of the problem - why doesn't the PTO accept standard CAD files for the drawings? This alone would encourage more drawings per application which in turn would improve patent quality. This deficiency is in my opinion greater than that posed by the continued use of PDF files for the specification/claims/abstract.
What is really needed here is an overhaul of EFS with extensive user input. I guess if you were to phrase this comment in a nutshell, it would be that the PTO lacks the vision to make EFS work for the customer base. Some input outside of the echo chamber is required to correct this deficiency.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622115457835
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Kevin Klughart
2021-05-27T07:37:37-04:00
2021-05-27T07:37:37-04:00
With all of the problems noted in the comments regarding the DOCX rollout, you would think that the PTO would allow (as a backup) the filing of a PDF file IN ADDITION TO the DOCX file so that if there were any problems in the PTO interpreting the DOCX submission that the PDF could be used as a backup. This would ensure that should the DOCX somehow become corrupted, the PDF file would remain as a substitute specification/claims/abstract.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622110755952
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Cheryl Fillekes
2021-05-27T06:19:15-04:00
2021-05-27T06:19:15-04:00
When you say you will be able to use DOCX to do "content-based validations pre-submission, identifying issues up front and allowing for them to be addressed before examination begins," because it "detects common errors, such as formatting errors, and provides instant feedback" don't you really mean we'll have to format these DOCX files using your MicroSoft(R) Word macros?
Word macros almost never work on OpenSource solutions such as OpenOffice and LibreOffice, the only option for those of us who run Linux or BSD.
Does the USPTO plan to fund moving our entire design drawing and document management systems over to MicroSoft Word on new hardware running a MicroSoft or Apple OS with this de facto vendor lock-in?
The AMS has solved this problem with AMSLaTeX that work on ALL platforms -- even ones without a GUI!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622110262795
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Cheryl Fillekes
2021-05-27T06:11:02-04:00
2021-05-27T06:11:02-04:00
When you say you will be able to use DOCX to do "content-based validations pre-submission, identifying issues up front and allowing for them to be addressed before examination begins," because it "detects common errors, such as formatting errors, and provides instant feedback" don't you really mean we'll have to format these DOCX files using your MicroSoft(R) Word macros?
These macros almost never work on OpenSource solutions such as OpenOffice and LibreOffice, which is pretty much the only option for those of us who run Linux on our desktop and laptop systems.
Do you really mean to force us to use MicroSoft or Apple operating systems, just in order to run MicroSoft Word, in order to format our patent applications with the USPTO macro suite?
Can you guarantee that secure versions of MicroSoft Word & the operating systems it runs on will be made available to us to avoid security breaches?
Are you planning to give us the extra thousand bucks it would take us to move our entire design drawing and document management systems over to MicroSoft Word on new hardware running MicroSoft or Apple operating systems? And, no, we're NOT going to use the 'online' versions of MS Word, what do you think we're crazy? We're air-gapped. Sorry.
Moving to what amounts to MicroSoft Word/Microsoft and Apple OS vendor lock-in seems like a pretty blinkered solution to the USPTO's apparent inability to maintain a complete set of PDF fonts.
Why not do what the American Mathematical Society does, and supply a set of LaTeX macros that work on ALL platforms -- even ones without a GUI!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622079679434
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
John Heithaus
2021-05-26T21:41:19-04:00
2021-05-26T21:41:19-04:00
I use Linux to do all my work. The docx output from libreoffice is very different from Microsoft word. Does this mean we all have to buy windows with ms office now? Is forcing all patent practitioners to single source their software from Microsoft legal? Why can’t the uspto take a few formats like .odt, .pdf, and .docx?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1622030352446
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Axel Nix
2021-05-26T07:59:12-04:00
2021-05-26T07:59:12-04:00
I applaud the USPTO's move to consider the submitted DOCX files as authoritative. That removes one of my biggest concerns, where I had to assume responsibility for the Office's rendering from DOCX to PDF.
I understand that there is some hesitation in the user community that DOCX may lead to publication errors. While I expect the opposite, maybe offer an option to redundantly submit a PDF copy of how the DOCX was meant to be rendered, in particular when it includes complex elements such as mathematical or chemical formulae?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621965070514
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Frank H Foster
2021-05-25T13:51:10-04:00
2021-05-25T13:51:10-04:00
We need both a docx patent application template and a docx style guide indicating such things as fonts, sizes, heading and directives for avoiding document error messages. I would like to read more about how to do it and less about how wonderful it will be. I already see a good reason for it. Trial and error is an unpleasant way to learn something.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621964123508
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
David Boundy
2021-05-25T13:35:23-04:00
2021-05-25T13:35:23-04:00
The PTO's IT staff are confusing two entirely different things -- "standard" vs. "interoperable" or "portable." The two are not synonyms!
The metric system is a "standard" All car alternators in 2021 are metric. But that doesn't mean that alternators are interchangeable. Most standards don't specify enough parameters to guarantee interoperability. That's certainly the case with ISO-29500 and ECMA 376 -- both leave many parameters as "implementation defined." (The PDF standard is different -- it's one of the few interoperability standards.)
Some of the problems of DOCX for the PTO's intended purpose are discussed at
https://brattahlid.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/is-docx-really-an-open-standard
DOCX won't work. It's a dumb idea. Give it up.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621961123115
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
David Boundy
2021-05-25T12:45:23-04:00
2021-05-25T12:45:23-04:00
The PTO's proposal to treat the DOCX as "the authoritative document" is meaningless: do you mean the DOCX as rendered in LibreOffice, the DOCX as rendered in MS Word 2016 on Windows Server, the DOCX as rendered in Word Perfect? If they're different (and they will be), which one wins?
Under the PTO's former proposal, the applicant would file a DOCX, the PTO's computer would show a PDF to the filer, the filer would have an hour to review it (the timeout period), and then the PDF would be "authoritative." Under the PTO’s May 25 proposal, the party filing the document will have no opportunity whatsoever to review the rendering that the PTO will rely on. Are equations rendered the way that they appear on the filer's computer, or some other way? Applicants will have no way to know, no way to check, no way to seek correction. The PTO’s May 25 proposal makes a really bad idea even worse. A poor opportunity to review a filing is better than no opportunity at all.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621951037493
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Alan Flum
2021-05-25T09:57:17-04:00
2021-05-25T09:57:17-04:00
I have been using DOCX filing for more than a year and until recently have been happy with it. However, the last two applications I filed had serious issues during the DOCX to PDF conversion process. Since you use the system-generated PDF file as the master document, not the Applicant-filed DOCX file, this caused me to receive a "Notice to File Corrected Application Papers." While, in both cases, ultimately there was a happy ending thanks to the helpful folks at the Application Assistance Unit and the EBC, it took up to five calls in and many weeks to resolve in each case.
I think there needs to be a direct mechanism to reporting issues with DOCX (and Patent Center) rather than relying on the EBC.
I hope you find this feedback helpful.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621948953071
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Daniel
2021-05-25T09:22:33-04:00
2021-05-25T09:22:33-04:00
The USPTO needs to drop the planned January 1, 2022 $400 penalty fee for failure to use DOCX becasue the conversion process is unreliable. I attended the DOCX training and it was a waste of time. They taught material already known to PDF filers. They merely provided web links and refused to answer questions about the legal options when the conversion contains errors. The USPTO is refusing to provide any process for correction of errors.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621948928225
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Anonymous
2021-05-25T09:22:08-04:00
2021-05-25T09:22:08-04:00
USPTO should not charge a special fee for those who wish to continue to upload documents in the .pdf format. Every part of the stated rationale is deeply flawed.
Docx is not an "open standard format", nor truly is it "supported by many popular applications, such as... Google Docs, and LibreOffice". It is a proprietary Microsoft format, which has been painstakingly reverse engineered but is still not fully supported by any application other than Microsoft Word.
"...eliminates the need to convert..." This takes seconds.
"...provides automatic metadata detection... and removal..." This can be done with the .pdf format too.
"we are adopting the submitted DOCX files as the authoritative document..." This is a terrible idea. While .pdf, as a standard format, looks exactly the same in any software program, .docx files frequently look quite different in different programs, ensuring there is no certainty regarding the intended appearance of the document.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621946828174
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Kevin Klughart
2021-05-25T08:47:08-04:00
2021-05-25T08:47:08-04:00
Don't have much confidence in the PTO's ability to implement this when they can't even get the signon for the web training for DOCX to work...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621946211657
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Russell C. Gache
2021-05-25T08:36:51-04:00
2021-05-25T08:36:51-04:00
I am not sure what you meant by, "the USPTO will be transitioning to DOCX for all filers." Are you saying that pdf format will no longer be accepted? It took years for the pdf format to "settle" into a known manner of uploading to PAIR and many are confident that DOCX will have its own teething pains. Also, using DOCX for drawings seems on its face confusing since DOCX was always meant as a non-graphical text standard. Applying that to drawings which nobody currently does seems problematic.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621944112474
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Dorothy Hauser
2021-05-25T08:01:52-04:00
2021-05-25T08:01:52-04:00
I have concerns regarding whether or not life science patent applications which include chemical structures, equations, etc. will 100% upload properly.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621944097232
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Greg Magel
2021-05-25T08:01:37-04:00
2021-05-25T08:01:37-04:00
I just tried my first toe in the .docx water a couple of days ago on EFS-Web, and it was a bust.
I uploaded a .docx version of an abstract with no known problems (1.5 line spacing, <150 words). It was rejected for insufficient line spacing. The error message was "Doesn't appear to have line spacing >1.05" . But both Microsoft Word and I knew it was 1.5.
I tried again after reformatting the Word document for 2.0 line spacing. Rejected again with the same diagnosis.
So I uploaded a PDF as usual.
Note that this was in EFS-Web in the Attach .docx section, not in Patent Center, if that makes a difference.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621943170542
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Erica Layman
2021-05-25T07:46:10-04:00
2021-05-25T07:46:10-04:00
When will the USPTO publish a docx style guide indicating fonts, sizes, and directives for effective docx filing. For example, where to place headings, favored paragraph numbering, etc. Right now everyone is guessing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/modernizing-patent-filing-with-docx#comment-1621943024284
Re: Modernizing patent filing with DOCX
Erik J. Heels
2021-05-25T07:43:44-04:00
2021-05-25T07:43:44-04:00
DOCX (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML), a format developed by Microsoft for MS Office, seems like an odd choice. OpenDocument (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument), an OASIS and ISO/IEC standard developed by the open source community at large, seems like the better/logical choice.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-hannah-wang#comment-1621738801050
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Hannah Wang, Primary Patent Examiner
RMTAP
2021-05-22T23:00:01-04:00
2021-05-22T23:00:01-04:00
It's great that innovation in the United States helps create new jobs for Americans and advance our nation. Each person discovers new interests and develops new skills as they learn. The willingness to constantly learn will help you find your hobbies, talents and complete a successful career path.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616291740723
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
cara menanam bawang merah
2021-03-20T21:55:40-04:00
2021-03-20T21:55:40-04:00
Will the public in every country have access to this technology in the future?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616269061661
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
Kashif Mahmood
2021-03-20T15:37:41-04:00
2021-03-20T15:37:41-04:00
Excellent initiative to use AI for patents search and classification etc. As business owner i can understand lot of people use deceptive practices to steal your identity your brand name .. finding smart ways to protect and promote brand creation is great. I hope AE will make difference
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1616210623667
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
Alex
2021-03-19T23:23:43-04:00
2021-03-19T23:23:43-04:00
I've seen first hand the great work that you've done at the USPTO. May your accomplishments be similarly bountiful in your next endeavor!!! Godspeed!!!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616151879066
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
Vincent Violago
2021-03-19T07:04:39-04:00
2021-03-19T07:04:39-04:00
Regarding the USPTO’s upgraded auto-classification system’s including “indicators that provide users with insight into the reasoning of the AI, by linking suggested CPC symbols to specific portions of the document,” is USPTO suggesting that it’s using machine learning combined with some kind of machine reasoning, neural logic reasoning, ontology reasoning, logic based symbolic, diagrammatic, or graphical reasoning? It’s unclear because USPTO merely mentioned providing “insight into the reasoning,” rather than providing some kind of reasoning per se.
In any case, this would be an extremely useful feature that could significantly improve the accuracy, precision, and consistency of CPC code assignments across all fields of invention.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616151852707
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
Vincent Violago
2021-03-19T07:04:12-04:00
2021-03-19T07:04:12-04:00
It’s clear that adding machine learning capability into USPTO’s patent search examination is just one of the many necessary steps the USPTO needs to take to stay abreast of the times.
It would be helpful if machine learning is also incorporated into USPTO’s publicly-accessible advanced patent search engine, rather than being just an exclusive feature of the patent search engine used by the examiners.
Also, the USPTO patent full-text and image database interface hasn’t seen a makeover for decades now. It is long overdue for an update to at least give it a much more modern look that’s more in-line with the rest of the USPTO’s website.
Having another publicly-accessible database that can be used for patent search verification purposes (e.g., to verify Google Patents search results) would be very useful to many people, especially to those who can’t afford to pay for subscription-only patent search databases.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616151415107
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
Vincent Violago
2021-03-19T06:56:55-04:00
2021-03-19T06:56:55-04:00
It would be helpful if machine learning is also incorporated into USPTO’s publicly-accessible advanced patent search engine, rather than being just an exclusive feature of the patent search engine used by the examiners.
Also, the USPTO patent full-text and image database interface hasn’t seen a makeover for decades now. It is long overdue for an update to at least give it a much more modern look that’s more in-line with the rest of the USPTO’s website. As it stands, it looks like a remnant from the past that seems to be a tacit acknowledgement by the USPTO that most people probably don’t use it as much as they use other patent search databases like Google Patents and thus not worth updating.
Still, having another publicly accessible database that can be used for patent search verification purposes (e.g., to verify Google Patents search results) would be very useful to many people, especially to those who can’t afford to pay for subscription-only patent search databases.
Regarding the USPTO’s upgraded auto-classification system’s including “indicators that provide users with insight into the reasoning of the AI, by linking suggested CPC symbols to specific portions of the document,” is USPTO suggesting that it’s using machine learning combined with some kind of machine reasoning, neural logic reasoning, ontology reasoning, logic based symbolic, diagrammatic, or graphical reasoning? It’s unclear because USPTO merely mentioned providing “insight into the reasoning,” rather than providing some kind of reasoning per se.
In any case, this would be an extremely useful feature that could significantly improve the accuracy, precision, and consistency of CPC code assignments across all fields of invention.
If one uses Google Patents (which has benefited significantly from being owned by arguably the top AI company in the world) as a benchmark, then machine learning as a whole still has ways to go, at least when it comes to doing patent searches.
Google Patent’s reliability and consistency can sometimes be easily tripped, for no obvious reason, when one makes even very minor changes in a previous keyword string. For example, adding even just one generic term to a set of multiple specific keywords can sometimes cause Google Patents to churn out significantly more irrelevant results than if the generic term were excluded.
But it’s clear that adding machine learning capability into USPTO’s patent search examination is just one of the many necessary steps USPTO needs to take to stay abreast of the times.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616144721496
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
Fritz M. Fleming
2021-03-19T05:05:21-04:00
2021-03-19T05:05:21-04:00
It would be nice to be able to use the same search tools as the Examiners do, once the Public Search Facility re-opens. Maybe the search system would be available remotely, even as a paid subscription service like the EPO offers. Being able to recreate the Examiner's search to see what the Examiner pulled up in certain search strings would be of great value. One question though. If one relies on AI to a large extent, how do you keep it from learning the wrong things or "unlearn" something? Text searching is very context specific and also depends at times on the quality of English from translations of applications of foreign origin. Just because something has the "right words" does not mean it is the "right reference." And sometimes, the "right words" aren't used at all by Applicant.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/artificial-intelligence-tools-at-the#comment-1616076995584
Re: Artificial intelligence tools at the USPTO
Bruce A. Lev
2021-03-18T10:16:35-04:00
2021-03-18T10:16:35-04:00
Are you considering allowing registered agents and attorneys to access the search aspect of that proposed system?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-celebrates-american-women-inventors#comment-1615890353800
Re: USPTO celebrates American women inventors and entrepreneurs
Sara Tynge
2021-03-16T06:25:53-04:00
2021-03-16T06:25:53-04:00
Tweet much more about female (and male) inventors and their inventions ALL year round!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-larita-jones#comment-1615730874968
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: LaRita Jones, Division Chief, Office of Human Resources, USPTO
TheGameLocus
2021-03-14T10:07:54-04:00
2021-03-14T10:07:54-04:00
great good job Larita
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the-growing-importance-of-international#comment-1614605167560
Re: The growing importance of international cooperation to the protection of industrial designs
Professor Joshua David Sarnoff
2021-03-01T08:26:07-05:00
2021-03-01T08:26:07-05:00
Drew and Mary:
Harmonizing formalities and addressing substantive differences is all to be commended. But even Judge Giles Rich thought that designs have no business being protected by the patent laws, as the doctrinal categories are wrong for the subject matter. Perhaps you can work toward a legislative solution that would restore designs to a sui generis system and in the process restore the public's repair rights? Happy to talk about this further.
Best,
Josh
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1612232843822
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
Khel sale
2021-02-01T21:27:23-05:00
2021-02-01T21:27:23-05:00
In my modest view, the way that a little patent holder can be effortlessly pushed around by a huge partnership that's encroaching on his/her licenses is a central opening in the framework! On the off chance that somebody takes my vehicle, I should call the police. On the off chance that somebody takes my thought and infringes on my issues US licenses, I need a great many dollars to persuade the court! That is an enormous obstacle from advancement in America!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1611961311840
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
Lawrence Kelly
2021-01-29T18:01:51-05:00
2021-01-29T18:01:51-05:00
Thank you Director Iancu for strengthening the USPTO and the IP practice in the U.S. with your patriotic service, vision, energy, wisdom, patience, talent, outreach, equity, and leadership. You are an outstanding example of a great public servant and champion of the American dream.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-releases-fy-2020-performance#comment-1611820246435
Re: USPTO releases FY 2020 Performance and Accountability Report
Elle
2021-01-28T02:50:46-05:00
2021-01-28T02:50:46-05:00
Dear author,
Please note the following link "Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for fiscal year (FY) 2020 " fails to load. I have tried three times. I have pretty fast internet 100mbps.
I would love to read your insights on the information shared to your shareholders/investors.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1611348780527
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
George
2021-01-22T15:53:00-05:00
2021-01-22T15:53:00-05:00
At least you tried to make some significant changes there, Director Iancu. That's appreciated. Thanks.
However many more things need to change at the USPTO (and quickly), ideally starting with the repeal of the absolutely 'horrible' and (despite it's intentionally euphemistic name) 'invention killing' AIA! It was a BIG mistake (and a 'con') by our heavily lobbied Congress, which made the lives of 1000's of our talented American inventors much worse and much less rewarding (if that was even possible to do). The Founders would definitely not have approved of the AIA, since it primarily rewards large corporations/monopolies and universities (while 'almost assuring' the failure of smaller entities, start-ups and individual inventors).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1611171330842
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
Mark Cohen
2021-01-20T14:35:30-05:00
2021-01-20T14:35:30-05:00
Thank you for your great contributions domestically and internationally.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1611093867911
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
Sean Malek
2021-01-19T17:04:27-05:00
2021-01-19T17:04:27-05:00
In my humble view the fact that a small patent holder can be easily pushed around by a large corporation who’s infringing on his/her patents is a big hole in the system!
If someone steals my car all I have to do is to call the police. If someone steals my idea and infringes on my issues US patents I need millions of dollars to convince the court!
That’s a huge deterrent from innovation in America!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/launch-of-the-national-council#comment-1611086076751
Re: Launch of the National Council for Expanding American Innovation
Dr. Sheetal karnik
2021-01-19T14:54:36-05:00
2021-01-19T14:54:36-05:00
HI,
I am Dr. Karnik, a registered patent agent and am also CEO /Founder of New Edge Science Academy (NESA) that fosters STEM education from K-12 and works with students on various research projects.
NESA mentors students (high school) on their research projects and also educate them about Intellectual Property and how to protect their inventions. I am very interested to be a part of NCEAI and would like to contribute.
Thanks very much
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leading-the-way-in-the#comment-1611067892168
Re: Leading the way in the IP economy
Gary Flax
2021-01-19T09:51:32-05:00
2021-01-19T09:51:32-05:00
How can the USPTO protect the small inventor and bussines when registering trade marks, and patents from large conglomerate and giant company’s who abuse the fact that they have money and attorneys and when they attack a small company or a individual- how can a small bussines or person muster up $24-50000 in defense or opposing ridicules demands but these bully’s.
I beg for Mr Director Iancu to talk to me so I can help though my trauma others who have will be abused by the “ loop holes for big company’s “ in attacks on others who can’t realy afford to defend even when on the right !!!!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advances-in-searching-for-prior#comment-1610283081616
Re: Advances in searching for prior art
Leonard
2021-01-10T07:51:21-05:00
2021-01-10T07:51:21-05:00
Wise, long overdue, and absolutely necessary promised advances in patent searching that will strengthen our invaluable annual plethora of United States patents. As invention is a justifiably vaunted core cultural competency of American genius, this advance is so very praiseworthy, if long overdue. Better late...
However, that said, I was nonetheless disappointed and negatively impressed by the somewhat passive, mere in-passing mention of access to advances in prior art searching for the general public, such as non-corporate inventors, themselves. After all, our own private inventors are also a valuable contingent of the American inventive genius deserving of expedited and much improved prior art searching access. So do help us, the independent inventors, sooner, not later. After all, we too do indeed, matter.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a-year-to-remember#comment-1610204820974
Re: A year to remember
Steve Morsa
2021-01-09T10:07:00-05:00
2021-01-09T10:07:00-05:00
The accomplishments by the entire hard-working Patent Office staff during these past four years of Director Iancu's leadership have been nothing short of extraordinary; in number, in their scope, and in their importance. This is especially so during this past year of the Covid pandemic.
May the incoming administration fully understand, appreciate, and indeed embrace the value to innovation -- particularly American innovation -- of keeping current Patent Office leadership in place; including for the critically-important purpose of continuing their work to better align PTAB processes and procedures with the true intentions of Congress when our legislators passed the American Invents Act (AIA).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a-year-to-remember#comment-1610030139454
Re: A year to remember
Tamara D. Fraizer
2021-01-07T09:35:39-05:00
2021-01-07T09:35:39-05:00
Thank you, Director Iancu, for this cogent perspective on innovation and the USPTO's support of innovators in 2020, as well as your leadership and commitment to that work. You make us proud.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview-practice-and-its-importance#comment-1609859828614
Re: Interview practice and its importance at the USPTO
Axel Nix
2021-01-05T10:17:08-05:00
2021-01-05T10:17:08-05:00
I am disappointed to see the First Action Interview program gone. Many examiners were not closely familiar with the program. In cases where examiners embraced it, the program worked very well.
When working with national phase entry applications I often find that a 5-minute phone call with the foreign attorney who drafted the application dramatically reduces the time I spent to understand the invention. The same is likely true for examiners. Why wait until after a first office action to have a conversation what the invention is really about?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a-year-to-remember#comment-1609795938075
Re: A year to remember
James Hastings
2021-01-04T16:32:18-05:00
2021-01-04T16:32:18-05:00
Director Iancu and USPTO colleagues, Thank you for the seamless transition to telework during the pandemic. The customer experience was not negatively impacted. You even managed to meet several TTAB performance goals that were set pre-pandemic! Nice job, all. James Hastings, Collen IP
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a-year-to-remember#comment-1609449362375
Re: A year to remember
Robert Jeffery Wallace
2020-12-31T16:16:02-05:00
2020-12-31T16:16:02-05:00
What a FANTASTIC Blog by the Director.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a-year-to-remember#comment-1609430869923
Re: A year to remember
Raymond Van Dyke
2020-12-31T11:07:49-05:00
2020-12-31T11:07:49-05:00
Director Iancu and all at the USPTO:
You did a marvelous job in adapting to the pandemic and keeping the United States patent system operational under trying circumstances.
Hopefully, 2021 will result in 25% more filings and a return to the physical realm.
From all of us U.S. practitioners we thank you!
Happy New Year!
Raymond Van Dyke, proud patent attorney
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview-practice-and-its-importance#comment-1609179475371
Re: Interview practice and its importance at the USPTO
Mark Alleman
2020-12-28T13:17:55-05:00
2020-12-28T13:17:55-05:00
The USPTO is doing many things right these days, so it surprised me to see this announcement. While the FAI program is not often used, it is undeniably a success for applicants. The first action allowance rate for FAI cases is reported to be around 35% and overall allowance rates are also higher than average. My clients will be disappointed. I hope there are plans to replace FAI with a new program that promotes interviews before the issuance of the first office action.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-releases-fy-2020-performance#comment-1609129958047
Re: USPTO releases FY 2020 Performance and Accountability Report
Ψ¨ΫΨ²Ψ±Ψ§ Ψ’Ψ±Ϊ©Ψ§Ψ―ΫΨ§
2020-12-27T23:32:38-05:00
2020-12-27T23:32:38-05:00
I'm so happy that the PAR is now online and available to members of the public. thank you for that
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-releases-fy-2020-performance#comment-1608907820567
Re: USPTO releases FY 2020 Performance and Accountability Report
Shubham Rishav
2020-12-25T09:50:20-05:00
2020-12-25T09:50:20-05:00
The performance looks great. Continue the good work team.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview-practice-and-its-importance#comment-1608737969199
Re: Interview practice and its importance at the USPTO
David Lewis
2020-12-23T10:39:29-05:00
2020-12-23T10:39:29-05:00
I think that removing this program is likely a mistake. For .2% of the cases, it has likely been beneficial, with little if any tax on the resources of the US Patent and Trademark Office. Perhaps the program can be tweaked to give longer periods of reply and/or ease the burden on the Examiner and Applicant prior to the first Office Action. Anything that can get the Examiner and Applicant talking early is likely good and this program was a reasonable attempt at that. Thank you in advance for considering these comments.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-releases-fy-2020-performance#comment-1608730753720
Re: USPTO releases FY 2020 Performance and Accountability Report
Mike Rogers
2020-12-23T08:39:13-05:00
2020-12-23T08:39:13-05:00
Hi. What exactly are the main financial issues that may create a real hurdle? Can you please elaborate.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview-practice-and-its-importance#comment-1608728463489
Re: Interview practice and its importance at the USPTO
stan sansone
2020-12-23T08:01:03-05:00
2020-12-23T08:01:03-05:00
It would be of interest to see if interviews help pro se applicants or hurt them. I would guess large corporations don't use interviews. Thanks for the information
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview-practice-and-its-importance#comment-1608726166241
Re: Interview practice and its importance at the USPTO
Cal Eustaquio
2020-12-23T07:22:46-05:00
2020-12-23T07:22:46-05:00
This post is very informative and I couldn't agree more: the interview is absolutely essential to examination and likely allowance. However, I think to make the interview more meaningful and relevant to request the applicant's agenda ahead of time where the examiner can set aside time to review the agenda against the last action written against the application.
Preferably, the agenda should be emailed to the examiner (which, I believe, is now standard and authorized per USPTO rules and regulations).
In addressing the concerns the applicant may have laid out in the agenda, the examiner should provide an email follow up with relevant responses to the applicant's agenda (time allowing).
In that way, discussion on the agenda topic at hand can be abbreviated or addressed with more relevance and detail where, upon the day of the interview, both parties can immediately engage into the crux of the matter.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advances-in-searching-for-prior#comment-1608299387028
Re: Advances in searching for prior art
Stephen Grant
2020-12-18T08:49:47-05:00
2020-12-18T08:49:47-05:00
Hopefully, US examiners will start to take allowances by other very competent examining authorities more seriously. I see many claims allowed by the EPO that are not allowed by US examiners based on the identical prior art. I also see US examiners that make unity of invention restriction requirements when the PCT searching authority found unity of invention to be present. Some of these appear to be merely a ploy to obtain a "count" or stop the clock on patent term adjustment.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advances-in-searching-for-prior#comment-1608235032466
Re: Advances in searching for prior art
Daniel L. Dawes
2020-12-17T14:57:12-05:00
2020-12-17T14:57:12-05:00
Just getting a proximity search tool like the Examiner's have had for a long time would be an advance for the general public in using the USPTO patent database.
When do we get it?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advances-in-searching-for-prior#comment-1608230054262
Re: Advances in searching for prior art
Ryan Schneer (Reg. 70,851)
2020-12-17T13:34:14-05:00
2020-12-17T13:34:14-05:00
Can we make EAST available to the general public? It would be a great asset to the public for pre filing patent searches. Many practitioners are former Examiners who are comfortable with the program.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-fights-trademark-scams#comment-1606975903028
Re: USPTO fights trademark scams
radoslav ivanov
2020-12-03T01:11:43-05:00
2020-12-03T01:11:43-05:00
These days, the scams keep getting higher, due to pandemy and low income.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-fights-trademark-scams#comment-1606812156355
Re: USPTO fights trademark scams
Ψ«Ψ¨Ψͺ Ψ΄Ψ±Ϊ©Ψͺ
2020-12-01T03:42:36-05:00
2020-12-01T03:42:36-05:00
Thank you PTO! This is really a good news for next generation of patent practitioners. The innovation and intellectual property system will definitely promote engine of economic growth and development.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-fights-trademark-scams#comment-1606396695083
Re: USPTO fights trademark scams
adwokat bielsko
2020-11-26T08:18:15-05:00
2020-11-26T08:18:15-05:00
I heard that USPTO were wrong a couple of times with the scam warnings.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-fights-trademark-scams#comment-1606296331654
Re: USPTO fights trademark scams
Peter Sloane
2020-11-25T04:25:31-05:00
2020-11-25T04:25:31-05:00
Why does the USPTO believe that it does not have the legal authority to bring an action for trademark infringement, false advertising, and unfair competition against those who seek to impersonate it and confuse its customers?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/successful-failover-test-ensures-the#comment-1595962496393
Re: Successful failover test ensures the stability of patent system applications at the USPTO
Matt Moyers
2020-07-28T14:54:56-04:00
2020-07-28T14:54:56-04:00
Good job! Keep going!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/successful-failover-test-ensures-the#comment-1595954292037
Re: Successful failover test ensures the stability of patent system applications at the USPTO
GMX
2020-07-28T12:38:12-04:00
2020-07-28T12:38:12-04:00
Now the patents will be more stable than ever. Thanks for this awesome research.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/successful-failover-test-ensures-the#comment-1595947154304
Re: Successful failover test ensures the stability of patent system applications at the USPTO
George Sachs
2020-07-28T10:39:14-04:00
2020-07-28T10:39:14-04:00
Very good to hear!!! Now if only examiners could be given more time to adequately do their jobs & help more American inventors obtain high quality and enforceable patents! That would greatly help our economy by transferring wealth from lawyers to inventors once again. That would also help create many more new jobs and allow us to compete with China & other countries, who will soon be out-innovating us and becoming the leaders in IP! The U.S. cannot afford to fall behind in innovation, new technology development & commercialization. Obtaining high quality & enforceable patents by rapidly declining numbers of 'independent inventors' and small start-ups is essential to avoid our falling behind!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/first-rate-information-technology-infrastructure#comment-1595864402284
Re: First-rate information technology infrastructure supports USPTO teleworkers nationwide
Subir imagen temporal
2020-07-27T11:40:02-04:00
2020-07-27T11:40:02-04:00
I'm Glad to read that, Good job Guys!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1591144687677
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
Djmwanga
2020-06-02T20:38:07-04:00
2020-06-02T20:38:07-04:00
Waoh these is amazing and will definitely be of great help to the future generation of patent practitioners.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-thomas-hong#comment-1591142351971
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Thomas Hong, Primary Patent Examiner
ShekinahSMS
2020-06-02T19:59:11-04:00
2020-06-02T19:59:11-04:00
Cool
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-elizabeth-chu#comment-1591107531363
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Elizabeth Chu, Social Media Specialist and Acting Website Editor-in-Chief
David Fernández
2020-06-02T10:18:51-04:00
2020-06-02T10:18:51-04:00
Great Post!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1591049815159
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
Naturalremedyideas.com
2020-06-01T18:16:55-04:00
2020-06-01T18:16:55-04:00
Thank you PTO! This is really a good news for next generation of patent practitioners. The innovation and intellectual property system will definitely promote engine of economic growth and development.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1590945595483
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
Paul M.
2020-05-31T13:19:55-04:00
2020-05-31T13:19:55-04:00
Its amazing. The kids of today are the future of tomorrow.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-elizabeth-chu#comment-1590490650421
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Elizabeth Chu, Social Media Specialist and Acting Website Editor-in-Chief
Peter S.
2020-05-26T06:57:30-04:00
2020-05-26T06:57:30-04:00
Thank you for your work. The USPTO should continue to reach out to the younger audience via social media audience and hold more events at schools to encourage the next generation of inventors.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1588564570787
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
Zero Sequences
2020-05-03T23:56:10-04:00
2020-05-03T23:56:10-04:00
Amazing Information of Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1588362265854
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
Sugouri Batra
2020-05-01T15:44:25-04:00
2020-05-01T15:44:25-04:00
Wow, thank you PTO for enabling and accelerating young patent attorney growth. Meaningful mentorship and first hand experience is crucial, but scarce. I look forward to appearing before the PTAB once I pass the patent bar exam.
Can’t wait to LEAP!!!!!!!!!
Forever Grateful,
Sugouri
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-launches-the-expanding-innovation#comment-1588266990170
Re: USPTO launches the Expanding Innovation Hub, a new online platform to encourage greater participation in the patent system
William Luke
2020-04-30T13:16:30-04:00
2020-04-30T13:16:30-04:00
A wonderful initiative by the USPTO. I think innovation in the ecosystem is the good option.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1588186009428
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
info sehat
2020-04-29T14:46:49-04:00
2020-04-29T14:46:49-04:00
"The innovation and intellectual property system behind it shape the engine of economic growth and development"
your sentence is truly evocative ... I like that
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab-launches-the-legal-experience#comment-1588135361803
Re: PTAB launches the Legal Experience and Advancement Program (LEAP) for the next generation of patent practitioners
Eddie M Green Jr
2020-04-29T00:42:41-04:00
2020-04-29T00:42:41-04:00
It would be nice if they did something for the inventor ,,,,like improving and protecting the patent rights for two years before exhaustion.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-launches-the-expanding-innovation#comment-1587585566365
Re: USPTO launches the Expanding Innovation Hub, a new online platform to encourage greater participation in the patent system
Tommy
2020-04-22T15:59:26-04:00
2020-04-22T15:59:26-04:00
it will make absolute sense if the academia, and government work together to broaden our innovation ecosphere demographically, geographically, and economically. Just as you rightly mention in your awesome post.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/nominations-now-open-for-the#comment-1587532761777
Re: Nominations now open for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation
stuwart Gabbrison
2020-04-22T01:19:21-04:00
2020-04-22T01:19:21-04:00
USPTO should spread its work and publish its work by making it worldwide. I hope the coronavirus epidemic will end soon and congratulations on advance and good luck to the winners.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1587480442720
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Mac Huawei
2020-04-21T10:47:22-04:00
2020-04-21T10:47:22-04:00
what a great job. I sincerely want to congratulate you on your great job. I can see how hardworking and dedicated you are. Keep up the good work, Davetta.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-launches-the-expanding-innovation#comment-1587404702313
Re: USPTO launches the Expanding Innovation Hub, a new online platform to encourage greater participation in the patent system
Jeff Hardin
2020-04-20T13:45:02-04:00
2020-04-20T13:45:02-04:00
Why does the USPTO continue to preach a false doctrine?
The SUCCESS Act Study revealed 79% of independent inventors who provided testimony said the inability to enforce & defend a patent at the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board once they receive it is a barrier to participating in the US patent system.
Telling underrepresented groups they'll benefit from sharing their idea with the public in pursuit of a patent, when they ultimately cannot enforce/defend it once received, is telling them a lie. Inventors told this very thing to the USPTO.
As one witness put it: "What good is a patent if you can't defend it?" See https://www.usinventor.org/2019/09/28/success-act-uspto-report/
If you care about your ideas, do not seek a patent in the United States until the USPTO stands behind and defends the patents it grants to inventors.
The only way to do that is Congress. Go to usinventor.org, sign the resolution, and be prepared to call your Congressperson and demand change.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-launches-the-expanding-innovation#comment-1586774665943
Re: USPTO launches the Expanding Innovation Hub, a new online platform to encourage greater participation in the patent system
Shayari realty
2020-04-13T06:44:25-04:00
2020-04-13T06:44:25-04:00
America’s economic prosperity and technological leadership depend on a strong and inclusive innovation ecosystem.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/nominations-now-open-for-the#comment-1586705151786
Re: Nominations now open for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation
Premium Blogger
2020-04-12T11:25:51-04:00
2020-04-12T11:25:51-04:00
USPTO should do more to popularize STEM by organizing seminars and workshops, arranging meetings between NMTI laureates and students. NMTI laureates make America proud but unfortunately, the young generation is not aware of their contribution and the huge potential of STEM.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586702345553
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
John Brillas
2020-04-12T10:39:05-04:00
2020-04-12T10:39:05-04:00
Great job!...So proud of you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586698458112
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
svece
2020-04-12T09:34:18-04:00
2020-04-12T09:34:18-04:00
Nice post!Keep with good work Davetta!
I am really impressed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586669488861
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Aneil Kumar
2020-04-12T01:31:28-04:00
2020-04-12T01:31:28-04:00
Hi, Devetta, Its very motivational experience sharing. There are very few this kind of people who inspire society to encourage for their well future. This is the true currency of any country as paper currency can destroy but knowledge grows as long as it spreads.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586243502072
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
CountriesID
2020-04-07T03:11:42-04:00
2020-04-07T03:11:42-04:00
It's good to see someome who cares about the inclusion of all backgrounds in a goverment agency. Congratulations Davetta. Keep up the good work.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586178544590
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Dino Es
2020-04-06T09:09:04-04:00
2020-04-06T09:09:04-04:00
Hello there Davetta, Thank you for sharing your story. extraordinary occupation and I need to salute you on your incredible employment. I can see the work and devotion you have.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-launches-the-expanding-innovation#comment-1586073066905
Re: USPTO launches the Expanding Innovation Hub, a new online platform to encourage greater participation in the patent system
Joe Root
2020-04-05T03:51:06-04:00
2020-04-05T03:51:06-04:00
A great initiative by the uspto. This will help in finding the patents much easier and cheaper.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586064791575
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Susan J. Palmer
2020-04-05T01:33:11-04:00
2020-04-05T01:33:11-04:00
great job and I want to congratulate you on your great job. I can see the work and dedication you have. Keep up the good work, Davetta.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1586017643476
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
P. Z. - consulente SEM
2020-04-04T12:27:23-04:00
2020-04-04T12:27:23-04:00
Amazing post Davetta Goins! Cheers from Italy.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1584960720203
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
CC
2020-03-23T06:52:00-04:00
2020-03-23T06:52:00-04:00
Hi Davetta,
Thank you for sharing your story. I am very inspired by your journey. Many thanks for your contributions to the community. I am grateful to be reading your story and truly inspired.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1584433846080
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Derly Khetlin
2020-03-17T04:30:46-04:00
2020-03-17T04:30:46-04:00
Hello Davetta, very good we are all so prond of you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1584269896082
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Ransom Ward
2020-03-15T06:58:16-04:00
2020-03-15T06:58:16-04:00
Congratulations Mrs. Goins, you’re an inspiration to a host of HBCU graduates. I too am a graduate of an HBCU, Tuskegee University to be exact; Class of ‘10 and ‘13. If you have time I would like to speak with you about an idea I have that may be beneficial to all parties involved. Please don’t hesitate to reach out to my email for more information. Thank you and stay blessed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/nominations-now-open-for-the#comment-1584252094702
Re: Nominations now open for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation
Prosanta Mondal
2020-03-15T02:01:34-04:00
2020-03-15T02:01:34-04:00
USPTO ought to do a lot of to popularize STEM by organizing seminars and workshops, transcription conferences between NMTI laureates and students. NMTI laureates build America proud however sadly young generation isn't aware of their contribution and large potential of STEM.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1583327824973
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Majestic Barcelona
2020-03-04T08:17:04-05:00
2020-03-04T08:17:04-05:00
great job and I want to congratulate you on your great job.
I can see the work and dedication you have. Keep up the good work, Davetta.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1583234468656
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Kadina Malloy
2020-03-03T06:21:08-05:00
2020-03-03T06:21:08-05:00
Hello Davetta Goins. My name is Kadina Malloy, I would love to meet you. I would love to Introduce you to my W.O.M.E.N group. We are always looking to network and learn from other Women.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight-on-commerce-davetta-goins#comment-1583166192287
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Davetta Goins, Supervisory Patent Examiner
Carolyn Tucker
2020-03-02T11:23:12-05:00
2020-03-02T11:23:12-05:00
Hello Davetta,
We are all so proud of you! As your parents and others in your community were inspirations for you, you are an inspiration for younger members of our family.
Aunt Jean
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/nominations-now-open-for-the#comment-1582686793666
Re: Nominations now open for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation
Terry Poe
2020-02-25T22:13:13-05:00
2020-02-25T22:13:13-05:00
USPTO should do more to popularize STEM by organizing seminars and workshops, arranging meetings between NMTI laureates and students.
NMTI laureates make America proud but unfortunately young generation is not aware about their contribution and huge potential of STEM.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/nominations-now-open-for-the#comment-1582669142363
Re: Nominations now open for the National Medal of Technology and Innovation
Michael Osei
2020-02-25T17:19:02-05:00
2020-02-25T17:19:02-05:00
That's an impeccable selection of speakers. The words of wisdom will be invaluable. In regards to the webinar, will it be archived in a follow up blog post?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/in-new-orleans-and-throughout#comment-1581403923731
Re: In New Orleans and throughout the world: USPTOβs IP attachΓ©s and the restorative impact of intellectual property
Jeannie
2020-02-11T01:52:03-05:00
2020-02-11T01:52:03-05:00
Glad to see all these hard working people making a difference!
Innovation is what drives any country to success. If innovation is allowed to flourish it will promote economic growth, help the people, help the whole country.
Making sure IP's are protected and allowed to be properly developed and commercialized is a great initiative that needs to continue!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/p4h#comment-1581164007773
Re: Innovations that change the world β apply for Patents for Humanity (P4H) by February 15, 2020
William L. Robinson, Jr.
2020-02-08T07:13:27-05:00
2020-02-08T07:13:27-05:00
We are preparing to start manufacturing our patent and patent pending air filtration (face mask and air filter) products. If this is something we could qualify for funding for then we are very interested in pursuing it!
Regards,
William L. Robinson, Jr.
Chairman & CEO
US HEAT Corporation
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/p4h#comment-1580747000887
Re: Innovations that change the world β apply for Patents for Humanity (P4H) by February 15, 2020
Darryl E Williams
2020-02-03T11:23:20-05:00
2020-02-03T11:23:20-05:00
About 50 years ago, an idea came to me for the purpose of growing tree seedlings indoors. My idea is a high density indoor vertical growing system, where literally millions of 6" tall tree seedlings may be grown indoors in an area with the floor space of a typical aircraft hanger. I later modified the design to enable the same vertical growing system to grow spirulina in massive quantities, inside a clean room that is free of insects and transient organic matter found in the outside.
I am willing to sell this idea, especially if a US Patent Search proves it to be a unique idea capable of having a patent granted to it.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1580184677327
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
smitha henny
2020-01-27T23:11:17-05:00
2020-01-27T23:11:17-05:00
well done ...nice achievement
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reflections-of-john-cabeca-uspto#comment-1579940866384
Re: Reflections of John Cabeca, USPTO Silicon Valley Regional Director
Daniel Miller
2020-01-25T03:27:46-05:00
2020-01-25T03:27:46-05:00
I own the success of my company to highly professional assistance of the Silicon Valley office of USPTO. You are doing a great job for tech community.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1578491927821
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
Nuoma911
2020-01-08T08:58:47-05:00
2020-01-08T08:58:47-05:00
Thank you John Goodenough for your work, thanks to you, a breakthrough in this technology will save the world!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1578248705124
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
Chris
2020-01-05T13:25:05-05:00
2020-01-05T13:25:05-05:00
John Goodenough is a very good man as well as outstanding engineer. Applause
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/national_disability_employment_awareness_month#comment-1577034241964
Re: National Disability Employment Awareness Month
Denis
2019-12-22T12:04:01-05:00
2019-12-22T12:04:01-05:00
People with disabilities are exactly the same as others. In my opinion, their physical condition should not have any significance in employment in government positions. Here, the intellectual abilities of man must be of decisive importance.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reflections-of-john-cabeca-uspto#comment-1576842636869
Re: Reflections of John Cabeca, USPTO Silicon Valley Regional Director
Marina Lavender
2019-12-20T06:50:36-05:00
2019-12-20T06:50:36-05:00
Very excited with the fact that the USPTO is currently looking to hire a new regional office director to lead and manage the Silicon Valley Regional Office in California. Let this person be an innovation ambassador in the region.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1576302958362
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
Alfred Mak
2019-12-14T00:55:58-05:00
2019-12-14T00:55:58-05:00
John Goodenough is an awesome person. I had read several books such as Solid Oxide Fuel Cell Technology, Witness to Grace and many more. Yes, it is necessary to develop electro-chemistry because of our demand. This is an era of nano-technologies.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reflections-of-john-cabeca-uspto#comment-1576231864067
Re: Reflections of John Cabeca, USPTO Silicon Valley Regional Director
Jobs
2019-12-13T05:11:04-05:00
2019-12-13T05:11:04-05:00
John is literally the best person I've ever seen in my entire life! this is really unfair.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reflections-of-john-cabeca-uspto#comment-1576165271627
Re: Reflections of John Cabeca, USPTO Silicon Valley Regional Director
Emil Ali
2019-12-12T10:41:11-05:00
2019-12-12T10:41:11-05:00
John is a great resource who will be missed, but the IP attache program is lucky to have him!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reflections-of-john-cabeca-uspto#comment-1576153662045
Re: Reflections of John Cabeca, USPTO Silicon Valley Regional Director
David Hong
2019-12-12T07:27:42-05:00
2019-12-12T07:27:42-05:00
USPTO's Silicon Valley office is a great resource for patent practitioners; really good attorney/agent centered programs; very pleased with the commitment and outreach to West Coast folks. Will miss Dir. Cabeca's friendly leadership at this office. Cheers.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1576103431862
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
alena putri
2019-12-11T17:30:31-05:00
2019-12-11T17:30:31-05:00
The rapid growth of technology in a very big era ... Even children now have their own cellphones ... people don't understand what steps to take when a failure has occurred.... much appreciated! This was very much useful.
Please let me know when you publish a new post. Great job for publishing such a beneficial article.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1576041437405
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
Network Legion
2019-12-11T00:17:17-05:00
2019-12-11T00:17:17-05:00
Very Impressive.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1575976142368
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
Lancelot
2019-12-10T06:09:02-05:00
2019-12-10T06:09:02-05:00
The rapid growth of lithium ion technology has opened doors unavailable in just the recent past. High torque cordless tools at a remote location to build life saving shelters from harsh elements in 3rd world countries is a reality today. We are still in the infancy stages i believe. What was only written in science fiction books by authors like the master, Issac Asimov some 40 years ago is now in every kids hand that has a cell phone that they take for granted. Little do people comprehend what strides and failures had to take place for we humans to get to "Now". Fascinating and in live time we get to watch the inventions grow in our lifetime. L
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto-recognizes-nobel-prize-in#comment-1575973735403
Re: USPTO recognizes Nobel Prize in Chemistry winners and inventors
Terry Poe
2019-12-10T05:28:55-05:00
2019-12-10T05:28:55-05:00
I think advancements in hydrogen electro-chemistry is even more significant than Lithium-ion technology.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/collegiate_inventors_competition_winners_announced#comment-1575914958456
Re: Collegiate Inventors Competition winners announced
Naren
2019-12-09T13:09:18-05:00
2019-12-09T13:09:18-05:00
This is inspiring!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/collegiate_inventors_competition_winners_announced#comment-1575822619217
Re: Collegiate Inventors Competition winners announced
Jen
2019-12-08T11:30:19-05:00
2019-12-08T11:30:19-05:00
This is amazing! Ideas and innovations for a good cause.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_issues_second_federal_register#comment-1575685972307
Re: USPTO issues second Federal Register Notice on artificial intelligence and innovation
azure trainer
2019-12-06T21:32:52-05:00
2019-12-06T21:32:52-05:00
just fantastic information and thanks for sharing AI stuff.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_report_on_underrepresented_groups#comment-1575200690000
Re: New report on underrepresented groups in patenting
John Harris
2019-12-01T06:44:50-05:00
2019-12-01T06:44:50-05:00
all Americans who are willing to work hard, persevere and take risks have the opportunity to innovate...
All people aren’t just women, minorities, and veterans...
Why the exclusion?? I didn’t chose to born a Caucasian male. There’s no advantage to being such in today’s market. If fact it seems to be a disadvantage at every turn. Thanks Congress!
I don’t appreciate the legislative action to turn the Caucasian male into a societal outcast. This is effectively the same thing the Nazi Germany did to the Jews.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_report_on_underrepresented_groups#comment-1575110034000
Re: New report on underrepresented groups in patenting
Jeff
2019-11-30T05:33:54-05:00
2019-11-30T05:33:54-05:00
79% of inventors told the USPTO of concerns on their inability to enforce a patent once it is received.
There is no protection for small inventors.
The facts:
1. In 2011, Congress changed patent law in favor of big business.
2. Now, when you enforce your patent, it will be challenged at the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) at the USPTO.
3. Per the 2017 AIPLA report, PTAB challenges cost a patent holder $450,000.
4. Patents are invalidated at the PTAB at an alarming rate of 85%.
Remember: A patent doesn’t give you the right to create anything; rather, it’s an instrument meant to exclude others from using your invention. So, once you’ve already paid thousands in legal & filing fees and shared your invention with the public in pursuit of a patent, when a big company wants to use it, considering the facts above, you are not only giving away your idea, you are giving away everything you have.
Want change? Go to usinventor.org and sign the resolution.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/your_feedback_is_driving_improvements#comment-1574864225000
Re: Your feedback is driving improvements to trademark filings and login user experience
Patent Practitioner
2019-11-27T09:17:05-05:00
2019-11-27T09:17:05-05:00
Why in the world have you removed public documents from private pair? They are by definition - public. There's no need to secure public information. This just makes everything take twice as long for registered users. Fix it.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_report_on_underrepresented_groups#comment-1574785729000
Re: New report on underrepresented groups in patenting
Steve Morsa
2019-11-26T11:28:49-05:00
2019-11-26T11:28:49-05:00
The Patent Office is to be congratulated for their excellent current and forthcoming resources, efforts, and initiatives to ensure that all inventors -- regardless of gender, race, geographic locations, or economic standing -- have full and equal opportunity and access to develop, protect, and commercialize their inventions.
That said, if and until such time that Congress and/or our Supreme Court restore full patentable eligibility to all inventions -- regardless of the field of innovation -- such opportunity and access will continue to be blocked; including for those most in need of American opportunity and access.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/your_feedback_is_driving_improvements#comment-1573059257000
Re: Your feedback is driving improvements to trademark filings and login user experience
Cristina N. Rubke
2019-11-06T11:54:17-05:00
2019-11-06T11:54:17-05:00
The two-step verification is very inconvenient and today does not work at all. With technology today, it would be great if the USPTO could come up with a more user-friendly (and less glitch) to address the fraud concerns.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight_on_commerce_megan_miller#comment-1572966050000
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Megan Miller, Plain Language Writer/Editor
Jocelyn Ram
2019-11-05T10:00:50-05:00
2019-11-05T10:00:50-05:00
I love your creative career path! I too combined engineering and communications skills to end up in intellectual property law.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/your_feedback_is_driving_improvements#comment-1572354993000
Re: Your feedback is driving improvements to trademark filings and login user experience
Erica
2019-10-29T09:16:33-04:00
2019-10-29T09:16:33-04:00
I've been trying to log-in several times over the course of yesterday and today, and the system isn't allowing me to access the TEAS-Plus application. How do I troubleshoot?
Thanks!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/your_feedback_is_driving_improvements#comment-1571868857000
Re: Your feedback is driving improvements to trademark filings and login user experience
Caro Evans
2019-10-23T18:14:17-04:00
2019-10-23T18:14:17-04:00
Hello
This has been an interesting experience so far. I’m sure the USPTO representatives hear this complaint frequently... it takes soooo long. I understand that there are millions of dollars inventions and you can only hire so many people, but 14 months to reach an examiner for review. Wow! I’m so excited about my invention and how it will change lives (the consumers and my family) that I am ready to get it done but I’m waiting on the Patent.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dog_days_of_summer#comment-1566499558000
Re: Dog Days of Summer
jon
2019-08-22T14:45:58-04:00
2019-08-22T14:45:58-04:00
pet microchips don't have GPS. That would require a battery. Their microchip is similar to that of a credit card, which does not require power.
it allows someone to bring a stray pet to the any vet, who then scans the microchip and is able to pull up the owner and vet information.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dog_days_of_summer#comment-1566499441000
Re: Dog Days of Summer
AHMED DEBABI
2019-08-22T14:44:01-04:00
2019-08-22T14:44:01-04:00
Attentiveness,care and love for animals,have pushed inventors to create products ,in order to care, give comfort or safety to our beloved pets. I cannot imagine a world without animals or trees ( by the way, I do include trees as pets ). After all, what kind of world we live in ,if animals ( and trees ) will be extinct ?! Animals ( and trees) are part of the divine creation,as such they deserve all our attention, love and protection. ...Ahmed Debabi,Inventor and U.S.Ptent Holder and Owner.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_proposes_patent_fee_adjustments#comment-1565548572000
Re: USPTO proposes patent fee adjustments
John D, Watts
2019-08-11T14:36:12-04:00
2019-08-11T14:36:12-04:00
The low patent application fee is helpful but not sufficient to maximize the gain for the USA, because most inventors don't have the money to put their inventions in production, and they loose it. I suggest the USPTO form an evaluation group to rate top ideas and offer them to suitable companies for development and marketing for a fixed % ownership set by the inventor.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_proposes_patent_fee_adjustments#comment-1565098333000
Re: USPTO proposes patent fee adjustments
Tia Loya
2019-08-06T09:32:13-04:00
2019-08-06T09:32:13-04:00
The cost to obtain a patent is already beyond what most people in this country can afford. Patents are just for the wealthy now.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_proposes_patent_fee_adjustments#comment-1564940124000
Re: USPTO proposes patent fee adjustments
Angelica F White
2019-08-04T13:35:24-04:00
2019-08-04T13:35:24-04:00
This fee increase will widen the disproportional advantage of those who can afford paying for IP lawyer. Pro-Se inventors would be further in disadvantage. We need instead to continue improve ways to protect the American Dream to any any ingenious person, and this include providing affordable fees, better support to Pro-Se and fair examination.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/camp_invention_prepares_tomorrow_s#comment-1562852229000
Re: Camp Invention prepares tomorrowβs innovators
RBITT
2019-07-11T09:37:09-04:00
2019-07-11T09:37:09-04:00
What a great initiative.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/intellectual_property_resources_in_your#comment-1562073311000
Re: Intellectual property resources in your area
Mayra Donate
2019-07-02T09:15:11-04:00
2019-07-02T09:15:11-04:00
This is wonderful information! I'll be able to guide a potential client in the right direction. Thanks.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_tribute_to_veterans#comment-1544051237000
Re: A tribute to veterans
Greg
2018-12-05T18:07:17-05:00
2018-12-05T18:07:17-05:00
Thank you for attempting to serve our vets after they have served us.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_tribute_to_veterans#comment-1543232976000
Re: A tribute to veterans
Melvin
2018-11-26T06:49:36-05:00
2018-11-26T06:49:36-05:00
Good morning,
I think that this is a great tribute to the men and women (and their families) for their service, sacrifice, and support to this great country of ours. I served in the Marine Corps and I enjoy knowing that I was able to serve as my great grandfather did in WW I, my father in Korea, and as my brothers did during the Iraq war along with countless others in service while wearing the uniform. Thank you for remembering and helping others to know and remember. Semper Fidelis.
R/
Melvin Shepard
USMC Retired
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_tribute_to_veterans#comment-1542789659000
Re: A tribute to veterans
Sandra Blackmon
2018-11-21T03:40:59-05:00
2018-11-21T03:40:59-05:00
Thank you!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_tribute_to_veterans#comment-1542735904000
Re: A tribute to veterans
Brian Banner
2018-11-20T12:45:04-05:00
2018-11-20T12:45:04-05:00
Veteran Donald W. Banner was the U.S. Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks during 1978 and 1979. As a Second Lieutenant in WWII he served as a P-47 fighter pilot and was shot down by Nazi Germany on his 39th mission in late 1944. He was captured and became a prisoner of war interned at a prison camp in Mooseburg, Germany until liberated by General Patton’s 3rd Army on April 29, 1945. He is buried is Section 69, grave 710 in Arlington National Cemetery.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight_on_commerce_juan_valentin#comment-1509368056000
Re: Spotlight on Commerce: Juan Valentin, Education Program Advisor, USPTO
Evan Guthrie Law Firm
2017-10-30T08:54:16-04:00
2017-10-30T08:54:16-04:00
Very inspiring story. Thanks for sharing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dream_to_reality_helping_inventors#comment-1505994314000
Re: Dream to Reality β Helping Inventors Patent New Technologies
aziz mousa
2017-09-21T07:45:14-04:00
2017-09-21T07:45:14-04:00
I have an invention in the field of motors and energy
I do not have the money to register or market his patent
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dream_to_reality_helping_inventors#comment-1505746375000
Re: Dream to Reality β Helping Inventors Patent New Technologies
Samson Seidel
2017-09-18T10:52:55-04:00
2017-09-18T10:52:55-04:00
Hello I am certain I am a victim of an attorney scam. Is there a resource through the uspto to help me recover from this treachery?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/avoiding_intellectual_property_theft_abroad#comment-1505664549000
Re: Avoiding Intellectual Property Theft Abroad
John
2017-09-17T12:09:09-04:00
2017-09-17T12:09:09-04:00
Can you direct me to a list of reputable firms that protect small companies against infringement world-wide?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dream_to_reality_helping_inventors#comment-1505255127000
Re: Dream to Reality β Helping Inventors Patent New Technologies
Angel
2017-09-12T18:25:27-04:00
2017-09-12T18:25:27-04:00
I would like to patent my idea but i can't find somebody to talk personally. I have to send my drawings to some place and nothing else. I don't know personally my lawyer, neither the draftman. If he don't understand i can't explain to him.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dream_to_reality_helping_inventors#comment-1505071771000
Re: Dream to Reality β Helping Inventors Patent New Technologies
Frank Jhonson
2017-09-10T15:29:31-04:00
2017-09-10T15:29:31-04:00
Buen día Srs de la USPTO,. Soy un humilde inventor, de muy bajos recursos, vivo en Bogotá Colombia, me gustaría patentar mi invento por primera vez y online en USPTO y aplicar al programa de ayuda al inventor para patentar mi invento siendo de nacionalidad extranjera. ¿Es esto posible? ¿que debo hacer?
Muchas gracias.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dream_to_reality_helping_inventors#comment-1504622571000
Re: Dream to Reality β Helping Inventors Patent New Technologies
RosaLee Niemi
2017-09-05T10:42:51-04:00
2017-09-05T10:42:51-04:00
The pro bono program is great, really. However, if one as myself finds that I am just above the level for this assistance there is no pro bono for folks like myself. So the wealthy who can afford the legal assistance ($35,000.00)and those who meet the pro bono level for assistance are taken care of for their patents and then there are those in the middle like myself who struggle completing the forms for their patent and hopefully get it approved without any "legal" assistance.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/dream_to_reality_helping_inventors#comment-1504609944000
Re: Dream to Reality β Helping Inventors Patent New Technologies
Kenneth W Buschmann
2017-09-05T07:12:24-04:00
2017-09-05T07:12:24-04:00
I wish to file a non-provisional application electronically as a micro-entity. Need some guidance. Fees, forms, how to submit etc.
I have files a provisional application September 29, 2016
Please give me some feedback
Thanks
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_report_presents_viewpoints_on#comment-1504137181000
Re: New Report Presents Viewpoints on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility
Seilas Phillips
2017-08-30T19:53:01-04:00
2017-08-30T19:53:01-04:00
Patent law is not only important, but essential to the evolving world of innnovation and proper market pursuit, especially as technology and their supporting works, continue to lead the charge into the future. As the dialogue around the parameters of justifiable patent applications continue, now more than ever, comprehensive dialogue must consider not only corporate position and fairness but just as rightfully so, new start ups and small/mid-level businesses and their right to pursue proper market pursuit with legal right and protection, in both monopolistic and oligopolistic interests.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/avoiding_intellectual_property_theft_abroad#comment-1503584164000
Re: Avoiding Intellectual Property Theft Abroad
Dino
2017-08-24T10:16:04-04:00
2017-08-24T10:16:04-04:00
Maybe one of the most effective ways to combat the fake markets is to mass serialise the original goods and empower the customers to check the originality and other product’s characteristics. Serialization is maybe the most powerful and cost effective anti-counterfeit solution, for example the solution offered by www.my-validactor.com is immediately available, easy to implement and at a cost near to zero.
Fighting counterfeiters could be an easy task if there is real willingness to combat them.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight_on_angela_nguyen_primary#comment-1499389339000
Re: Spotlight on Primary Patent Examiner Angela Nguyen
Vinay kapoor
2017-07-06T21:02:19-04:00
2017-07-06T21:02:19-04:00
I am new to this website but like the down to earth and humble people running this office.
It makes me feel i am in good hands!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight_on_angela_nguyen_primary#comment-1498667101000
Re: Spotlight on Primary Patent Examiner Angela Nguyen
Andres Sustic
2017-06-28T12:25:01-04:00
2017-06-28T12:25:01-04:00
Hi Angela,
Very inspiring story about your upbringing and how it has brought out the very best in you. It should hopefully inspire younger people to seek a career in STEM and to realize that the greatest satisfaction a scientist can have is in seeing how one's contributions positively impact our quality of life as a society, and certainly as individuals.
Thanks for sharing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_global_trademark_harmonization#comment-1498044300000
Re: Update on Global Trademark Harmonization
Jackie Packard
2017-06-21T07:25:00-04:00
2017-06-21T07:25:00-04:00
Would this global trademark harmonization result in lower filing costs if we were to file in all countries at the same time ie. WIPO?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_global_trademark_harmonization#comment-1498044014000
Re: Update on Global Trademark Harmonization
Jackie Packard
2017-06-21T07:20:14-04:00
2017-06-21T07:20:14-04:00
This is exciting news! Is there a timeline in mind for testing/implementation? Will India be part of future discussions? Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight_on_angela_nguyen_primary#comment-1497470399000
Re: Spotlight on Primary Patent Examiner Angela Nguyen
Moses X.
2017-06-14T15:59:59-04:00
2017-06-14T15:59:59-04:00
Thank you for your contribution and public service in the USPTO. I admire what patent examiners do for the integrity and health of the U.S. patent system and IP-related economy in general.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spotlight_on_angela_nguyen_primary#comment-1496315430000
Re: Spotlight on Primary Patent Examiner Angela Nguyen
Leslie Fischer
2017-06-01T07:10:30-04:00
2017-06-01T07:10:30-04:00
This is a wonderful post and a great way to recognize USPTO employees. Nice job to the Office and Examiner Nguyen
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/celebrating_women_of_innovation#comment-1494133760000
Re: Celebrating Women of Innovation
Andy Gibbs
2017-05-07T01:09:20-04:00
2017-05-07T01:09:20-04:00
Wow! Lamarr and Antheil's frequency hopping
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/celebrating_women_of_innovation#comment-1493310171000
Re: Celebrating Women of Innovation
Livia Dinu
2017-04-27T12:22:51-04:00
2017-04-27T12:22:51-04:00
It is very refreshing and inspiring to find out of STEM innitiative dedicated to women professionals in this in-demand field for diversity and inclusion.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/celebrating_women_of_innovation#comment-1490221008000
Re: Celebrating Women of Innovation
Sonja Straus
2017-03-22T18:16:48-04:00
2017-03-22T18:16:48-04:00
I really like this announcement about women in STEM, but this post looks terrible when shared on social media. No image or title appears on Facebook - just a generic "www.commerce.gov" or "www.uspto.gov" website is listed depending on which url I try to use. Help me help you, please! Make this more shareable!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/better_protection_for_industrial_designs#comment-1484323613000
Re: Better Protection for Industrial Designs through International Cooperation
David Carol Neill
2017-01-13T11:06:53-05:00
2017-01-13T11:06:53-05:00
How can the Patent office protect the interest of the inventors when using these unsecured computers? It seems that our protection is completely compromised on the Internet ? How are we protected ?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/more_new_ways_to_explore#comment-1484278322000
Re: More New Ways to Explore Patent Data
Amnon M Cohen
2017-01-12T22:32:02-05:00
2017-01-12T22:32:02-05:00
The Mother and Father of new economic development resulted from yet new products and services, are the Inventor and Investor in merging commercial projects.
Just registering and publishing patentable new arts is far from the mandated objective of sought economic development from patent protection.
The USA Department Of Commerce will be wiser to look at the proposed PrePatent PrePartnership Registry solution which will turn the statistics of only 2%-4% successful/useful patents to reach the markets into about 40% success by the yet new modern wisdom of the proposal I own.
The Merchants of Venice wanted a Patent System which will let them know who is the artist they can safely invest in as The Mother of Invention, so they can Father it as the first Commercial Partners.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_fights_fraudulent_trademark_solicitations#comment-1482340252000
Re: USPTO Fights Fraudulent Trademark Solicitations
Consumer
2016-12-21T12:10:52-05:00
2016-12-21T12:10:52-05:00
Didn't appear to have much effect: I just got a letter from those crooks Yesterday 12/20/2016
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_fights_fraudulent_trademark_solicitations#comment-1482339518000
Re: USPTO Fights Fraudulent Trademark Solicitations
Cheryl Hodgson
2016-12-21T11:58:38-05:00
2016-12-21T11:58:38-05:00
It's ABOUT TIME! After 10 years of complaining about these scam artists, we are happy to see the government agency charged with preventing consumer confusion in the market is trying to clean up its own house in this area.
We can not put client contact info into your system any longer as the solicitations are simply too difficult to keep up with and the clients are constantly calling, or accusing their attorneys of not telling them about additional fees and charges.
Let's hope this is just the beginning.
Thank you
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_fights_fraudulent_trademark_solicitations#comment-1482329713000
Re: USPTO Fights Fraudulent Trademark Solicitations
https://www.paydayloans.mom
2016-12-21T09:15:13-05:00
2016-12-21T09:15:13-05:00
I think registered trademark is a valuable asset...How to provide support to law enforcement officials working on this issue?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_trademark_register#comment-1478775253000
Re: Improving the Trademark Register
Allison Strickland Ricketts
2016-11-10T05:54:13-05:00
2016-11-10T05:54:13-05:00
Could the Office provide a Word version of the new declaration formats? We are updating our forms and it would be great if we could copy/paste the ten revised declarations from your forms rather than re-typing each of them. Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/results_of_the_clarity_of#comment-1478690696000
Re: Results of the Clarity of the Record Pilot
RICHARD NEIFELD
2016-11-09T06:24:56-05:00
2016-11-09T06:24:56-05:00
On 11-9-2016, EFS-Web was down for an extended period of time. The link to the USPTO site to the EFS-Web contingency server, lead to a page indicating that that page was no longer supported by the USPTO and that page did not provide the EFS-Web contingency server interface. So Contingency was down when EFS-Web was down. Please fix the infrastructure so that EFS-Web contingency is NOT down, when EFS-Web is down.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/it_innovation_at_the_uspto#comment-1478609303000
Re: IT Innovation at the USPTO in 2016
RICK NEIFELD
2016-11-08T07:48:23-05:00
2016-11-08T07:48:23-05:00
It has been about 15 years since I first noted specific IT issues for PTO to address, to improve public usability of PTO IT resources. Twice since then I noted the same issues and then gave up because no one listened. So, I list one issue here I hope you can resolve. The page http://appft1.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.html does not automatically set the focus to the sole text entry box on that page. There is no other use for this page, but to enter text in the sole text entry box (for published patent application number). Compare http://patft.uspto.gov/netahtml/PTO/srchnum.htm (which sets the focus to the text entry box for patents. If you can resolve that problem, I will take heart that perhaps now someone is listening.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/it_innovation_at_the_uspto#comment-1478544397000
Re: IT Innovation at the USPTO in 2016
Warren Thomas
2016-11-07T13:46:37-05:00
2016-11-07T13:46:37-05:00
Note that I have submitted feedback via the website. At one point, I received an email saying the email address I'd sent to was "unmonitored." I'd simply clicked the email icon (a mailto link), which pre-populated an email in my default mail application. My questions were never answered (including the follow up). From non-intuitive flows and inconsistent information (the User Guide spends 30+ pages on patent owners entering an appearance but none on filing a Patent Owner Response), to the far below standards UI for a "modern" web application (multiple independently scrolling tables? columns that are formatted different only different screens--alignment and text versus cryptic icons?), this application does not appear to have had the "customer experience" at the forefront of its design or development--at least not the customers who are paying the fees (soon to significantly increase) to avail themselves of the adjudication the system is designed to enable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/it_innovation_at_the_uspto#comment-1478544332000
Re: IT Innovation at the USPTO in 2016
Warren Thomas
2016-11-07T13:45:32-05:00
2016-11-07T13:45:32-05:00
(part 2 of long comment) Note that I have submitted feedback via the website. At one point, I received an email saying the email address I'd sent to was "unmonitored." I'd simply clicked the email icon (a mailto link), which pre-populated an email in my default mail application. My questions were never answered (including the follow up). From non-intuitive flows and inconsistent information (the User Guide spends 30+ pages on patent owners entering an appearance but none on filing a Patent Owner Response), to the far below standards UI for a "modern" web application (multiple independently scrolling tables? columns that are formatted different only different screens--alignment and text versus cryptic icons? poorly formatted columns for the width of text? puzzling and unchangable sort order of existing documents on Document upload screen?), this application does not appear to have had the "customer experience" at the forefront of its design or development--at least not the customers who are paying the fees (soon to significantly increase) to avail themselves of the adjudication the system is designed to enable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/it_innovation_at_the_uspto#comment-1478544305000
Re: IT Innovation at the USPTO in 2016
Warren Thomas
2016-11-07T13:45:05-05:00
2016-11-07T13:45:05-05:00
Mr. Owens, you stated that PTAB E2E "has received tremendous positive feedback." From whom, might I ask?
From the clients who use it to file, watch, and access documents in AIA trials? From users accustomed to commercial websites--in terms of usability, mobile accessibility, workflow, or even lack of obvious defects and bugs in a production environment?
I would find it surprising to hear that these communities have given "tremendous positive feedback." There are so many errors, inconsistencies, and flat out "bugs" that either haven't been fixed or the PTO has not indicated they're fixed (even where I know they are--the "Known Issues" document still lists them as problems). This has been a big step backwards for me and my team.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/it_innovation_at_the_uspto#comment-1478544242000
Re: IT Innovation at the USPTO in 2016
Warren Thomas
2016-11-07T13:44:02-05:00
2016-11-07T13:44:02-05:00
Mr. Owens, you stated that PTAB E2E "has received tremendous positive feedback." From whom, might I ask?
From the clients who use it to file, watch, and access documents in AIA trials? From users accustomed to commercial websites--in terms of usability, mobile accessibility, workflow, or even lack of obvious defects and bugs in a production environment?
I would find it surprising to hear that these communities have given "tremendous positive feedback." There are so many errors, inconsistencies, and flat out "bugs" that either haven't been fixed or the PTO has not indicated they're fixed (even where I know they are--the "Known Issues" document still lists them as problems). This has been a big step backwards for me and my team.
Note that I have submitted feedback via the website. At one point, I received an email saying the email address I'd sent to was "unmonitored." I'd simply clicked the email icon (a mailto link), which pre-populated an email in my default mail application. My questions were never answered (including the follow up). From non-intuitive flows and inconsistent information (the User Guide spends 30+ pages on patent owners entering an appearance but none on filing a Patent Owner Response), to the far below standards UI for a "modern" web application (multiple independently scrolling tables? columns that are formatted different only different screens--alignment and text versus cryptic icons? poorly formatted columns for the width of text? puzzling and unchangable sort order of existing documents on Document upload screen?), this application does not appear to have had the "customer experience" at the forefront of its design or development--at least not the customers who are paying the fees (soon to significantly increase) to avail themselves of the adjudication the system is designed to enable.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/protecting_the_rights_of_american#comment-1476460783000
Re: Protecting the Rights of American Innovators in Cuba
Augusto Perera, Esq.
2016-10-14T11:59:43-04:00
2016-10-14T11:59:43-04:00
Having worked at OCPI as a Cuban lawyer, and now as a licensed US lawyer, I was glad to hear that Russ Slifer, Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Deputy Director of the USPTO, had this historic meeting with OCPI officials. I think this was a great opportunity to discuss ways to improve communications between the Offices to cooperate more.
I also hope that he and his Cuban counterparts discussed current IP legal issues, including claims by Cuban exiles over trademarks confiscated by the Cuban Government without compensation. This is just one of many topics that need to be discussed and addressed in order for the countries to cooperate fully and transparently.
Augusto Perera
Attorney and Counselor at Law
5975 Sunset Drive, Suite 705
Miami, FL 33143 USA
Tel. 305-669-9848
Fax 305-669-9851
tm@bordasiplaw.com
www.bordasiplaw.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_launches_two_new_online#comment-1462380237000
Re: USPTO Launches Two New Online Fee Payment Tools
Bill Wiltrack
2016-05-04T12:43:57-04:00
2016-05-04T12:43:57-04:00
Hello,
First time I visited your site.
I can't seem to find exactly where the dollar rates for a provisional patent are found.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_submits_its_fiscal_year1#comment-1461013899000
Re: USPTO Submits its Fiscal Year 2017 Congressional Budget Justification
matt
2016-04-18T17:11:39-04:00
2016-04-18T17:11:39-04:00
$3.3 billion in fee revenue seems like an incredible amount of money? This is good news however as it means that the US is progressing well which is actually, believe it or not, good for the rest of the world.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_launches_two_new_online#comment-1460377373000
Re: USPTO Launches Two New Online Fee Payment Tools
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
2016-04-11T08:22:53-04:00
2016-04-11T08:22:53-04:00
Are these new procedures for Deposit Account payments and Maintenance Fee payments only? Not the usual credit card payments? Thanks
Sandra Sutton
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_issues_final_rules_for#comment-1459440964000
Re: PTAB Issues Final Rules for Improved Proceedings
American Inventor
2016-03-31T12:16:04-04:00
2016-03-31T12:16:04-04:00
BRI should be eliminated altogether. The claim construction standard used in district courts would be much more consistent with the process in which patents are granted in the first place.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improvements_in_measuring_patent_quality#comment-1459438329000
Re: Improvements in Measuring Patent Quality Metrics
USPTO
2016-03-31T11:32:09-04:00
2016-03-31T11:32:09-04:00
Aida,
Thanks for your question. Yes, we will webcast the full day of the symposium, and will be posting further information about this on the USPTO website soon.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improvements_in_measuring_patent_quality#comment-1459426458000
Re: Improvements in Measuring Patent Quality Metrics
Aida Dolotbaeva
2016-03-31T08:14:18-04:00
2016-03-31T08:14:18-04:00
Hello,
will the Patent Community Symposium on Wednesday, April 27, be webcast?
Thank you
Aida Dolotbaeva
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leadership_in_all_uspto_regional#comment-1454135384000
Re: Leadership in All USPTO Regional Offices
Godlove
2016-01-30T01:29:44-05:00
2016-01-30T01:29:44-05:00
Congratulation Molly Kocialski
I hope you will make a fine director.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leadership_in_all_uspto_regional#comment-1453988607000
Re: Leadership in All USPTO Regional Offices
https://www.thedebtconsolidationreviews.com
2016-01-28T08:43:27-05:00
2016-01-28T08:43:27-05:00
I think what USPTO regional offices put tools into the hands of individuals who need assistance at every step of the business lifecycle... whether it is possible to join your teams? -:)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_historic_moment_for_the#comment-1453936693000
Re: A Historic Moment for the USPTO and Innovators Everywhere
zaenudin
2016-01-27T18:18:13-05:00
2016-01-27T18:18:13-05:00
your blog is one of several types , I am very happy with the way you set the topic .
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_historic_moment_for_the#comment-1451992184000
Re: A Historic Moment for the USPTO and Innovators Everywhere
USPTO
2016-01-05T06:09:44-05:00
2016-01-05T06:09:44-05:00
Preeti, we are planning to post the next vacancy for Dallas around mid May for a mid-September class of entry-level examiners.
Please monitor USAJobs.gov (keywords: USPTO Dallas) as well as LinkedIn and @USPTOJobs on Twitter for news of the job opening.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/power_and_systems_update#comment-1451795658000
Re: Power and Systems Update
JOHN ALTY
2016-01-02T23:34:18-05:00
2016-01-02T23:34:18-05:00
Dear Russell
Happy New year and best wishes to USPTO from the UK IPO. Congratulations on the hard work and dedication of your teams in getting things back up and running. Early on in my time as CEO of the UK IPO we suffered a DDOS attack which meant we had to take down all our external systems for a few days, which was a little stressful to say the least. I hope you and your team get some rest over the New Year.
best wishes
John Alty
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_historic_moment_for_the#comment-1451521185000
Re: A Historic Moment for the USPTO and Innovators Everywhere
Bernadette Anderson
2015-12-30T19:19:45-05:00
2015-12-30T19:19:45-05:00
Congratulations to Hope Shimabuku on becoming the first Director of the Texas Regional Office.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/enhanced_patent_quality_initiative_moving#comment-1451458622000
Re: Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative: Moving Forward
Sophia
2015-12-30T01:57:02-05:00
2015-12-30T01:57:02-05:00
It is certainly very important to ensure quality in such processes where it really counts. I believe that the processes you have taken to try to improve outcomes are necessary and it sounds like you are already seeing results. Good news and thank you for sharing details of this collaboration.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_historic_moment_for_the#comment-1450201024000
Re: A Historic Moment for the USPTO and Innovators Everywhere
Preeti Narayan
2015-12-15T12:37:04-05:00
2015-12-15T12:37:04-05:00
Thank you for your article. This is exciting news for us Dallas residents.
When do you expect the next round of hiring for Patent examiners in Dallas will be? I didn't know and hence didn't apply the first time.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_historic_moment_for_the#comment-1449894274000
Re: A Historic Moment for the USPTO and Innovators Everywhere
Danny Gow
2015-12-11T23:24:34-05:00
2015-12-11T23:24:34-05:00
Congratulations Hope!
All the best,
Danny Gow
Director, R&D
TT Electronics, Carrollton TX
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/enhanced_patent_quality_initiative_moving#comment-1446822099000
Re: Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative: Moving Forward
Victor A Rivas
2015-11-06T10:01:39-05:00
2015-11-06T10:01:39-05:00
First
Thank you for this needed programs & assistance to inventors but also to industry to look for common ground of progress.
I like USPTO's format for us no lawyers to understand and be able to seek legal counsel to next level once we do our homework about USPTO programs and initiatives.
As far as The USPTO' s work and innovative approach in today IP matters
Our taxes are well invested.
The San Jose USPTO office great move
That's Cool it saves ??And nowadays ideas move ?? Fast
Nanotechnology Inventor
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/icons_for_intellectual_property_concepts#comment-1446193521000
Re: Icons for Intellectual Property Concepts Unveiled
Sophia
2015-10-30T04:25:21-04:00
2015-10-30T04:25:21-04:00
This is something that I wouldn't have considered important before, but the article gives good information about why these icons are crucial. I think the icons are very clear, effective, and artistic. They represent excellent ways to produce abstract concepts in pictorial form. It was a good idea to involve members of the public in their creation.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/joint_communique_between_u_s#comment-1439558628000
Re: Joint Communique Between U.S. and Brazil on Patent Work Sharing
Sergio F Chacon
2015-08-14T09:23:48-04:00
2015-08-14T09:23:48-04:00
U. S. National Phase in Brazil
Protocol Number: DE RS 016060013063
Filed: Filing date: September 08TH, 2006
Priorities claimed: US 10/805,117 of 19.13.2004
Dear Sirs: It is great news to know that the subject of backlogs has been discussed. What has come out of the joint communication? I cite above one (of many) applications filed in 2006, for which every fee possible has been paid and which still awaits examination. If INPI in Brazil wishes to be taken serious, they will have to do substantially better.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/addressing_ip_rights_issues_in#comment-1438213174000
Re: Addressing IP Rights Issues in China
susanrey
2015-07-29T19:39:34-04:00
2015-07-29T19:39:34-04:00
Your trip is very meaningful and also an informative article, which informs me that the China is trying their best to pave the way for their own development. This is also a big opportunity for America and other countries to have a cooperation relationship with China. just like environment, economy and other kind of cooperation is very benefit for us. the IP is also a big problem in our country.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/addressing_ip_rights_issues_in#comment-1437535139000
Re: Addressing IP Rights Issues in China
Christian Browne
2015-07-21T23:18:59-04:00
2015-07-21T23:18:59-04:00
Its good to see that the USPTO is trying to address these issues with China. Historically China has been the manufacturer of products incorporating IP developed outside China and as such it has not been in China's interest to develop a robust IP registration and enforcement protocol.
One hopes that as China moves away from outsourced manufacturing to innovation and development of IP, it will value a robust registration and enforcement regime in order to protect IP developed in China. This hopefully will have spin-off benefits for all other countries.
The aim of any long term strategy must be to get China to sign up to and comply with the various international IP protocols.
Christian Browne http://www.summerfieldbrowne.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/farewell_from_uspto_s_commissioner#comment-1435505719000
Re: Farewell from USPTOβs Commissioner for Patents
Bob Spaulding
2015-06-28T11:35:19-04:00
2015-06-28T11:35:19-04:00
Good Job Peggy! I wish you well!
I was hoping you would be the one examining my idea...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_launches_enhanced_patent_quality#comment-1426990380000
Re: USPTO Launches Enhanced Patent Quality Initiative
William T. Fryer III
2015-03-21T22:13:00-04:00
2015-03-21T22:13:00-04:00
To: Director Lee. I urge the PTO to make the Patent Quality session event videos and papers available on the Internet, as they do for most PTO Roundtables, as promptly as possible. I, and a large group of the ABA, IP Section members, will be attending its annual CLE in Maryland at the same time as the PTO Patent Quality event. It is an unfortunate conflict. I request that adequate time be allowed to digest the event results, for the Section leadership, its members and others to respond after the Patent Quality Event.
William T. Fryer III
Professor Emeritus, University of Baltimore School of Law, Patent Attorney
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/user_feedback_plays_key_role#comment-1423215757000
Re: User Feedback Plays Key Role in New USPTO Website
Randall Svihla
2015-02-06T04:42:37-05:00
2015-02-06T04:42:37-05:00
Why is all of the text on the new website gray? It's hard to read. Why not just use black? It's easier to read. I liked the look of the old website better, and knew where to find everything I needed. Now I have to relearn where to find everything. Would it be possible to go back to the old website? Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/user_feedback_plays_key_role#comment-1422902555000
Re: User Feedback Plays Key Role in New USPTO Website
Steve
2015-02-02T13:42:35-05:00
2015-02-02T13:42:35-05:00
Love the new site, the kids site , and the blog - thanks!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_pro_bono_program_expansion#comment-1418924543000
Re: Patent Pro Bono Program Expansion to Benefit Inventors Nationwide
Ramasamy Rangan
2014-12-18T12:42:23-05:00
2014-12-18T12:42:23-05:00
I am a USPTO agent based in Kansas. I am interested in doing some probono work. But as I am not a member of federal bar ,I am not able to offer my services. Is the any thing I can do to get USPTO probono work established in Kansas.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_uspto_satellite_offices#comment-1417701968000
Re: Update on USPTO Satellite Offices
junior Moananu
2014-12-04T09:06:08-05:00
2014-12-04T09:06:08-05:00
Please open a satellite office in Honolulu Hawaii.
That office will serve the pacific region which includes Guam and
American Samoa.
The current use of the Hawaii State Library for patent searches and filing is really inefficient.
Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_establishes_special_examination_unit#comment-1417217560000
Re: USPTO Establishes Special Examination Unit for Pro Se Applicants
Warren Nelson
2014-11-28T18:32:40-05:00
2014-11-28T18:32:40-05:00
how much is the patent and issue fee for pro se applicants?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_pro_bono_program_expansion#comment-1416438297000
Re: Patent Pro Bono Program Expansion to Benefit Inventors Nationwide
partoftheartrealitytv
2014-11-19T18:04:57-05:00
2014-11-19T18:04:57-05:00
This program should provise a contested service to the following:
http://www.uspto.gov/aia_implementation/20120113-ippr_report.pdf
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_pro_bono_program_expansion#comment-1416407975000
Re: Patent Pro Bono Program Expansion to Benefit Inventors Nationwide
Bruce Burdick
2014-11-19T09:39:35-05:00
2014-11-19T09:39:35-05:00
I applaud the Deputy Under Secretary for committing the Administration to the goal "to balance the playing field for all entrepreneurs looking to innovate." I wish actions matched words. When I started practice 40 years ago, the filing fee was $35, issue fees were low, no maintenance fees, applications not published, patents more respected, and enforcement simpler and much less expensive. In short a small inventor had a chance. Today, you surely know that patents are mostly a "rich man's" tool.
14 pro bono patents out of over 8,000,000 is not even a pittance, but I applaud the start.
I recall being instructed in law school “As a patent attorney, you must charge a reasonable fee or you'll go broke or get fired." Law firms have billable hour quotas, so pro bono cases get forced on reluctant junior associates.
Frankly, the Government must fund this to get decent participation and decent quality. Right now it's an unfunded mandate you seek to impose on patent attorneys.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/roundtables_engage_the_public_on#comment-1413400632000
Re: Roundtables Engage the Public on Digital Copyright Policy
Stanley Brick
2014-10-15T15:17:12-04:00
2014-10-15T15:17:12-04:00
Big business takes what artist make. Copyright is dead to the micro small business.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_s_plain_language_toolkit#comment-1412685871000
Re: USPTOβs Plain Language Toolkit Empowers Public on Patent Litigation
Lonnie Caldwell
2014-10-07T08:44:31-04:00
2014-10-07T08:44:31-04:00
The very limited protection a US patent offers comes to a surprise to most of our customers. While in Asia, we have factories they simply redesign a 90 degree corner to a 30 degree radius and get a new US patent. Then ship to the USA. I have seen this happen more times than I can count.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_s_plain_language_toolkit#comment-1412251684000
Re: USPTOβs Plain Language Toolkit Empowers Public on Patent Litigation
Lawrence Pope
2014-10-02T08:08:04-04:00
2014-10-02T08:08:04-04:00
The web pages appear to provide useful information. But is there any reporting of the reaction to the Toolkit by either laymen or professionals? Who specifically within the Office worked on its development and was anyone outside the Office involved in its development?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_s_plain_language_toolkit#comment-1411667933000
Re: USPTOβs Plain Language Toolkit Empowers Public on Patent Litigation
Anthony N. Woloch
2014-09-25T13:58:53-04:00
2014-09-25T13:58:53-04:00
Please provide the names and titles of the moderator and speaker/presenter for the September 18, 2014 webinar covering the Patent Litigation Toolkit. Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/roundtables_engage_the_public_on#comment-1411557334000
Re: Roundtables Engage the Public on Digital Copyright Policy
rosi
2014-09-24T07:15:34-04:00
2014-09-24T07:15:34-04:00
Awesome post,It is good to know people joined in this discussion.Thanks a lot.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/expanded_2014_edison_scholars_program#comment-1410962292000
Re: Expanded 2014 Edison Scholars Program to Focus on Litigation Issues
Jeffrey A. Birchak
2014-09-17T09:58:12-04:00
2014-09-17T09:58:12-04:00
While the idea of gathering actual data to make policy decisions rather than speculation and rhetoric is very appealing to me, what I am very concerned with is the tone of this entire blog entry. As a patent holder of a substantial number of U.S. patents and pending applications who may need to rely on the enforcement of patent rights to see a return on our decade-long investment in our technology, should somebody decide to simply copy it, I am disturbed by the tone of the Agency tasked with administering those rights. Why is there no "ToolKit" for small businesses whose technology has been stolen by large market encumbents? Instead, we get a toolkit for alleged infringers. That's like a county government sending out a toolkit for squatters who receive eviction notices from property owners.
As a start to adjust this "tone," perhaps at the very least Professor Hegde's research could include the disastrous effects on inventors and society as a whole resulting from erroneous withholding of the patent right from deserving inventors as a function of examination quality, and not just problems of erroneous grants.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_uspto_s_implementation#comment-1409231195000
Re: Update on USPTO's Implementation of 'Alice v. CLS Bank'
Chris Norman
2014-08-28T09:06:35-04:00
2014-08-28T09:06:35-04:00
There is a very distinct difference between an "idea" and a well thought out concept by one skilled in the art of a field.
Apple invented the iphone. Prior to the IPhone we had flip phones and other phones, sticks etc. Is the IPhone a novel invention? Isn’t it comprised of computer chips that existed? It is essentially a mini-computer. Did Apple receive many patents for the IPhone? Yes. Would Apple today after Alice? Was it an improvement?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_uspto_s_implementation#comment-1409231170000
Re: Update on USPTO's Implementation of 'Alice v. CLS Bank'
Chris Norman
2014-08-28T09:06:10-04:00
2014-08-28T09:06:10-04:00
The English language consists of 26 characters. They can only be combined in a discrete way. There are only so many words and so many word combinations. I realize this is a leap to copyright law. Under Alice, combining words in the English language into a new order is not novel. If this is the case, then Stephen King can’t own his novels and Amazon could freely operate by copying his work verbatim.
The Supreme Court took a major step to hurt small business innovation. Individuals spend years working on their ideas and the Supreme Court just moved the ball.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_uspto_s_implementation#comment-1407413524000
Re: Update on USPTO's Implementation of 'Alice v. CLS Bank'
Brian Buchheit
2014-08-07T08:12:04-04:00
2014-08-07T08:12:04-04:00
I am handling three patents that were being issued, but have been withdrawn per the above. In each instance, a boilerplate response has been sent. The Office is simply stating a conclusory subjective opinion, which prevents patent attorneys from addressing the USPTO concerns in a meaningful way. Worse, since the Examiners who initially believed the cases to be allowable yet have had their initial assessment forcibly changed, it is exceptionally unlikely that rationale arguments based on the Court's opinion will result in "pulled" cases being allowed again. Hence, appeals based on ill-formed rejections will be necessary.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_uspto_s_implementation#comment-1407233450000
Re: Update on USPTO's Implementation of 'Alice v. CLS Bank'
Sean Sullivan
2014-08-05T06:10:50-04:00
2014-08-05T06:10:50-04:00
The problem with the preliminary examination instructions and the withdrawal of the notices of allowance is that there is no guidance as to how an "abstract idea" is determined. The post-Alice office actions have offered no analysis of whether a claim is drawn to an abstract idea, but rather a mere conclusory statement that the claim is abstract. This appears to have resulted in a per se exclusion of business method patents, which impermissibly broadens the scope of the Supreme Court decisions on subject matter eligibility.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_our_satellite_offices#comment-1402938186000
Re: Update on Our Satellite Offices
2014-06-16T13:03:06-04:00
2014-06-16T13:03:06-04:00
Have the PTO considered opening another satellite office in the Southern Eastern region? I believe the North Carolina region could use a satellite office there.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/calling_on_the_crowd_to1#comment-1398271386000
Re: Calling on the Crowd to Help Increase Patent Quality
George White
2014-04-23T12:43:06-04:00
2014-04-23T12:43:06-04:00
To be useful to the system in general, these corporate provided databases need to be available to the public. And, of course, something can't be prior art unless it is considered "published".
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/calling_on_the_crowd_to1#comment-1394791119000
Re: Calling on the Crowd to Help Increase Patent Quality
Wendy Koba
2014-03-14T05:58:39-04:00
2014-03-14T05:58:39-04:00
I remain concerned about the proliferation of otherwise not available documents (e.g., the 'disclosures' of corporations that are not deemed worthy for patent protection) that companies are now more than willing to 'share' as prior art.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/calling_on_the_crowd_to1#comment-1394726342000
Re: Calling on the Crowd to Help Increase Patent Quality
Chris Lee
2014-03-13T11:59:02-04:00
2014-03-13T11:59:02-04:00
Crowdsourcing may provide innovative solutions to many problems but what may be some of the unintended consequences of allowing outside influences to enter into the patent approval process?
Large corporations have already gained an increased advantage with recent changes to allow for post patent challenges.
What will be the impact on independent inventors when large corporations might hire dozens of experts and likely former patent examiners to negatively influence patent applications for all manner of patents that might threaten their existing businesses?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/building_a_better_patent_system#comment-1393233320000
Re: Building a Better Patent System
David Safran
2014-02-24T04:15:20-05:00
2014-02-24T04:15:20-05:00
The statement is incorrect since there is a six year statute of limitations, an action to enforce a patent for acts commited prior to expiration of a patent can be brought after the patent expires and in that litigation, the court could rule that the patent was invalid.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/building_a_better_patent_system#comment-1392990451000
Re: Building a Better Patent System
Alan Harrison
2014-02-21T08:47:31-05:00
2014-02-21T08:47:31-05:00
Under the "I Got a Letter Page," I am curious about the basis for the following statement: "Also, note that the claims of a patent can be invalidated by federal courts and/or the USPTO prior to their expiration, but not afterwards."
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/moving_forward_in_2014#comment-1392219960000
Re: Moving Forward in 2014
Stephen Powers
2014-02-12T10:46:00-05:00
2014-02-12T10:46:00-05:00
Congratulations!
We were so pleased to hear of your new role as the Deputy Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
We trust that you will continue to work for a balanced intellectual property (IP) system that promotes innovation. Please be aware that you have our full support. We wish you all the best as you represent us.
Stephen Powers
Gulf Coast Intellectual Property Group
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/moving_forward_in_2014#comment-1390838266000
Re: Moving Forward in 2014
Nickolaus E. Leggett
2014-01-27T10:57:46-05:00
2014-01-27T10:57:46-05:00
In the long run, we must look for an alternative to traditional patents for many independent inventors. One alternative is an inventors’ certificate. In this process, USPTO staffers would take inputs written by the applicants and help the applicants to write their own claims. The application for an inventors’ certificate would be examined in the same manner as a patent application. Issued inventors’ certificates would then be enforced to a limited degree by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Inventors’ certificates could be sold as patents are. However, the DOJ enforcement services would only be provided to the original inventor who is the certificate owner. This is a significant step away from the current patent which is a license to sue in court. With the inventors’ certificate the independent inventor and the Federal government become temporary partners in the protection of each new invention.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_revises_mpep_publication_process#comment-1387811293000
Re: USPTO Revises MPEP Publication Process
Janet Gongola
2013-12-23T10:08:13-05:00
2013-12-23T10:08:13-05:00
Thank you for your feedback regarding the new MPEP publication process and use of IdeaScale. The Office plans to resume use of IdeaScale to receive public input on the MPEP as soon as we release the next new edition in the late winter or early spring of 2014. I encourage you to submit your comments to help us keep the MPEP up-to-date and a useful resource for patent application filing and prosecution guidance.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_revises_mpep_publication_process#comment-1387811152000
Re: USPTO Revises MPEP Publication Process
Janet Gongola, Associate Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy
2013-12-23T10:05:52-05:00
2013-12-23T10:05:52-05:00
The Office plans to release a new edition of the MPEP incorporating changes necessitated by the America Invents Act in the late winter or early spring of 2014.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_revises_mpep_publication_process#comment-1387463228000
Re: USPTO Revises MPEP Publication Process
David Meeks
2013-12-19T09:27:08-05:00
2013-12-19T09:27:08-05:00
Do you know when the first new edition will be available?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_revises_mpep_publication_process#comment-1385913755000
Re: USPTO Revises MPEP Publication Process
Ryan Alley
2013-12-01T11:02:35-05:00
2013-12-01T11:02:35-05:00
I think this is a good update to the MPEP drafting process. Thanks to the Office for putting in the consideration and effort in keeping the MPEP better up-to-date. I encourage the Office to really publicize the IdeaScale implementation when it goes live and to give consideration and feedback on the public input received from IdeaScale. Nice work.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/veterans_day_2013#comment-1383643061000
Re: Veterans Day 2013
Barney Molldrem
2013-11-05T04:17:41-05:00
2013-11-05T04:17:41-05:00
Quite a few of us registered patent attorneys and agents also served in the Armed Forces before serving the inventor community. In my local area, for example (Syracuse, NY), there are several I can readily identify. I am an Air Force veteran, as was Tom (another practitioner), and Jim and Harold are Navy veterans. I am sure there are many, many others scattered across our country that are service veterans who also possess USPTO registration numbers.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1380118756000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Anne Barschall
2013-09-25T10:19:16-04:00
2013-09-25T10:19:16-04:00
I just hope that it should become clear that if a person posts a YouTube video where he or she sings someone else's song that should not be a crime, nor should it result in huge statutory damages. The penalties should be restricted to either collecting reasonable royalties or taking the video down.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1379365286000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Gary Cohn
2013-09-16T17:01:26-04:00
2013-09-16T17:01:26-04:00
Copyright in its current incarnation is depressing to me as a consumer. I can't go to any community website nowadays without a legal threat being plastered in front of me at almost every other website. I don't feel like I can express myself freely anymore without worrying that I'm going to be harassed and potentially threatened by some faceless rights-holding entity.
Whatever is done, please draw a bright line between commercial and non-commercial infringement. The Internet is my escape. Don't take that away from me.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_s_global_intellectual_property1#comment-1379325602000
Re: USPTOβs Global Intellectual Property Academy Expands its Assistance to U.S. Companies and Training of Foreign Officials
Lenny Bollingham
2013-09-16T06:00:02-04:00
2013-09-16T06:00:02-04:00
It is very important to share patent protection with the world. There should still be a chance to allow similar disclosure to work together if possible. They may compete, but they probably complement. Accidents happen, and usually they can be very positive. To protect a right that cannot possibly be implemented everywhere is a huge travesty in world economic growth. I think the office is making great strides in unilateral IP economic growth.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_our_dallas#comment-1378205459000
Re: An Update on Our Dallas, Denver, and Silicon Valley Offices
Richard Wanamaker
2013-09-03T06:50:59-04:00
2013-09-03T06:50:59-04:00
Only one comment posted? Hard to believe there has only been one relevant comment submitted on this issue.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377751363000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Eric Newport
2013-08-29T00:42:43-04:00
2013-08-29T00:42:43-04:00
Shira, this blog post attracted some attention from Slashdot. I strongly recommend having a look at one of the most popular comments posted on that site (link below). Here is the full text of the post:
"1. Stop trying to control the non-commercial filesharing. The damages to creators are, at worst, about as big as trespassing on private property that isn't near a house or is actively exploited - like say, a forest. The positive effects, meanwhile, are huge and not to be neglected. Instead focus on the commercial filesharing efforts and the people making money on protected works without sharing those profits.
2. Lots of works can no longer be used because their right holders cannot be found (orphan works). In order to solve this problem, copyrighted works should be registered or face a very short copyright term on e.g. five years after publication. An extension of this idea is that economic copyright should only be allowed as long as the copyrighted works do have a substantial value, therefore we have a yearly fee of 2^x where x is the number of years a copyrighted work has been published. This ensures orphaned works become public domain, but it also ensures that copyrighted works that no longer have any commercial value also falls into public domain.
3. Copyright terms either need to be severely reduced, or there needs to be an exception clause for archivists, museums, libraries and the like to let them complete and create as complete collections of works as possible, lest our entire culture from the fifties and onward disappear.
Just a couple of ideas to get started..." (Source: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?threshold=5&mode=thread&commentsort=0&op=Change&sid=4107391&cid=44616155&pid=44616155)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377702903000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Kent Southers
2013-08-28T11:15:03-04:00
2013-08-28T11:15:03-04:00
Copyright should be very simple ... if it ain't yours, and you didn't get permission to use it (purchased or free), then you stole it, and that is a crime. Fair use in the digital era has transformed into rampant legalized theft. What was intended to allow educational purposes without commercial gain/loss has transformed into license to avoid payment (read loss) to originators around the world.
Additionally, using portions of copyrighted works as creative works is also tantamount to theft. Allowing others to strip portions of an original creation to make up some collage or other derivative is depriving the originator. At a minimum, any proceeds derived from the sale of derivative works shall require a prorated portion of the proceeds distributed between the original creator and the derivative creation. It is an absolute abomination for someone to profit from another work without compensating them for their contribution.
Copyright rules have been far too lax, for far too long granting loopholes as license to legalized theft. It is time for that to come to a screeching hault. Expressing concerens about wanting to hear from uses of copyrighted material, sounds good, but the reality is that the users of copyrighted material want to pay as little (i.e. free) possible. Laws that foster legalized theft out of concern for the end user are abominant to those who are the creators and distributors. Allowing the legalized theft, in whole or in part. of copyrighted works is demeaning and devaluing to creators of copyrighted works and has a negative impact on the role of copyrighted works in our economic system by devaluing them. Copyright laws that promote legalized theft (i.e. no commerce) also have negative impact on the taxation that would accompany appropriate compensation for licensed purchase of copyrighted materials or works.
Again, it might sound child-like, but if it ain't yours and you didn't get permission to have/use it ... you stole it. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377693006000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Rick Huard
2013-08-28T08:30:06-04:00
2013-08-28T08:30:06-04:00
Why is the USPTO, and not the Copyright Office, issuing a paper on copyright policy?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377296451000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Bob Wentz
2013-08-23T18:20:51-04:00
2013-08-23T18:20:51-04:00
Please reduce the absurd duration of copyright. We can argue about exactly how long, but anything above 30 years is definitely absurd. Also copyright would be better if anything above 20 years required a substantial payment.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377257464000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Shira Perlmutter
2013-08-23T07:31:04-04:00
2013-08-23T07:31:04-04:00
I’m pleased to see that our green paper on copyright policy has caught the attention of so many, and I’m glad people are choosing to share their thoughts in this blog. Also remember that, as I wrote in this post, we will soon be issuing formal requests for comments on a number of items in this report and convening various public events. We’ll be sure to get the word out when that happens. Until then I invite you to continue sharing thoughts on this blog. We do read them. – Shira Perlmutter, USPTO Chief Policy Officer and Director for International Affairs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377235849000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Tamiko Rochelle Franklin
2013-08-23T01:30:49-04:00
2013-08-23T01:30:49-04:00
After years of managing copyright and related rights on behalf of content creators many of whose only point of distribution is internet based, any solution to the problems concerning copyright dispute management and resolution, in order to be effective must be technological, in the sense of online/ internet based, and personal in terms of recognizing and handling privacy and other conflicts of law which arise actual users are located worldwide in a simple and direct manner. There are many more people who eek out a living as independent contractors and creators in these industries who have a very difficult time effectively pursuing and enforcing their rights worldwide. Often to a cannibal type end, where before a creator can support a business their products are copied and the potential economic return pilfered by bots, cheats and other digital rights management scams. We need a system designed to address the concerns of all creators, including those of user generated content.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377195738000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Vanessa
2013-08-22T14:22:18-04:00
2013-08-22T14:22:18-04:00
Copyrights are far too long now and are being used to destroy American culture by making it basically impossible to re-use old media without risking huge legal battles, massive fines, etc. 70 or 90 years beyond the death of the author is hardly "limited" when most people who see a piece of media will be dead by the time it (theoretically) becomes Public Domain.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377130286000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Michael Sprague
2013-08-21T20:11:26-04:00
2013-08-21T20:11:26-04:00
Is this the forum for comments? There may be a few people whose comments could require more than 1,000 characters.
Perhaps you could provide a forum for that crowd, too.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377105510000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Leslie Satenstein
2013-08-21T13:18:30-04:00
2013-08-21T13:18:30-04:00
The bigger picture is that the USA has been overwhelmed with too many laws that treat copyright material (programs for example) as patents. That said, there is a requirement to reduce the life of a copyright from infinity to some reasonable number of years, (Around the creative lifetime of an author), and to allow a length after his/her death for the spouses to benefit.
As well, fair use needs to be vigorously defined, so as to prevent litigation. Perhaps the maximum penalty for violation say, for text, could be a penny a word, for a work of art, the value of the copy or a single lost sale.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377093523000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Mary Hodder
2013-08-21T09:58:43-04:00
2013-08-21T09:58:43-04:00
Hi,
Questions:
1. How and to where to I submit comments?
2. What is the deadline for comments?
3. What is the format and do you have specific questions you want answered?
4. How do I get on the list to receive information about the Green Paper, submissions and the results?
Thanks,
mary hodder
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377090950000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Nick Patterson
2013-08-21T09:15:50-04:00
2013-08-21T09:15:50-04:00
Two comments:
1) The roots of copyright law lie in a LIMITED time of protection for authors; the counterbalance is the public good and the free spread of ideas. We are currently in a grotesquely skewed state of affairs, where the original idea of the public good has been lost.
Copyright law should be rebalanced with hefty protections that protect the public's rights to use and benefit from information and content.
2) First Sale - in a digital world where the move has been towards licensing content, rather than owning it, new policies have to be put in places to allow the unfettered use of such content within the context of libraries, research, and scholarship.
These are activities which benefit society as a whole, and should be amply protected.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377088901000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Stephen Garriga
2013-08-21T08:41:41-04:00
2013-08-21T08:41:41-04:00
The original intent of copyright was to motivate enrichment of the public domain by allowing for a period (14 years with a one-time extension to 28 years if requested, I believe) during which production costs could be recouped and maybe a reasonable profit achieved. The focus over time has shifted (some would say perverted) to the recouping of costs and the making/milking of profit rather than the enrichment of the public domain. In the digital age, especially with digital goods, reproduction costs are close to zero so the focus should probably be on recouping production costs. I think the public good is better served by an enriched public domain more than any individual or corporation maintaining control of so called intellectual assets, so would argue for a term a) sufficient to recoup 120% of production costs, or b) the original 14 or 28 years - whichever came first.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377088142000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
William Barnette
2013-08-21T08:29:02-04:00
2013-08-21T08:29:02-04:00
I would like to thank you for addressing this issue, albeit 10 years too late, but cheers anyway right?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377061139000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Philippe Symons
2013-08-21T00:58:59-04:00
2013-08-21T00:58:59-04:00
Patents should severely be limited. Also software patents should be cancelled completely or at least limited to 5 years after invention.
Also the patents should be reviewed by a professional and should require an implementation, so we get rid of all those "abstract" patents that only exist to cover future inventions as broadly as possible.
A lot of startups are forced into a license of a patent they don't need just because a lot of abstract patents exist or patents on technology that was only new 20 years ago.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377043309000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Joey Reid
2013-08-20T20:01:49-04:00
2013-08-20T20:01:49-04:00
From DMCA abuse[1] to causing the destruction of recording[2] and Documentaries, the current laws are destroying our cultural heritage.[3] Some changes that I'd like to see are:
* Reform the DMCA to punish takedown abuse. $150,000 per false takedown?
* If we're going to treat intellectual property like real property, it should be taxed like real property If you no longer make enough to pay for a copyright extensions, it should go into the PD
* Someone who makes copies without permission should pay a fine, but it should be at the regular royalty rate for the item x copies made. So upload a song, its iTunes price x number of downloads, with perhaps a 20x penalty to discourage doing it, not the current draconian $150,000 per copy.
[1] torrentfreak.com/fox-censors-cory-doctorows-homeland-novel-from-google-130420/
[2]www.digitalmusicnews.com/permalink/2013/20130215archives#f3DBKAwelujA9tNFocKQyg
[3] www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2001/11/48625?currentPage=all
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377031392000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Ken Walter
2013-08-20T16:43:12-04:00
2013-08-20T16:43:12-04:00
First and foremost, patent trolls must be put out of business. Buying a patent solely to use it in lawsuits cannot be allowed, and should be punitively discouraged. Patent holders must demonstrate upon challenge, and certainly whenever they wish to sue for possible infringement, that they are moving forward to bring a product or service to market in order to retain their patent rights. To sue without producing stifles innovation.
Second, (and somewhat related) Prior Art must be respected. This will require a decent database, yes, and people who are familiar with the field under discussion, but the news is filled with cases of people being granted patents for ideas that have been published, used, and marketed for years - considered so "common sense" that patenting it was ridiculous - and then suing the existing users for infringement. The very fact that someone was using what you "patented" before you got around to doing so should invalidate the patent.
The Patent and copyright system should be a way to protect one's own investment in development, not a weapon to wage a war against people who are actually innovating, or a litigious shortcut to profits you have not done the work to earn.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377029940000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Matthew Vaughan
2013-08-20T16:19:00-04:00
2013-08-20T16:19:00-04:00
I appreciate that you are seeking some public input on copyright; however, I believe that copyright is so fundamentally broken, for instance in terms of duration and damages, that major problems, conflict, and injustices will continue to exist until those are fixed, and what you are discussing will almost certainly do nothing to fix this. I also believe that copyright as it currently exists is counter to the Constitution, because I believe it IMPEDES progress in the creative arts rather than fosters it, while substantially curtailing the rights of the People of the United States, whom it is supposed to benefit.
To address a few of the specific points:
"Improving the operation of the notice and takedown system for removing infringing content from the Internet under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)."
- One key point that needs to be addressed is penalties for entities that ABUSE this system. The system is widely abused at present, leading to substantial harm to innocent parties, but there are no penalties for those who abuse it.
"The appropriate calibration of statutory damages in the context of (1) individual file sharers and (2) secondary liability for large-scale infringement."
- This is one area where clearly the penalties are on the order of 1000x higher than they ought to be. It isn't a matter of "calibration", it's a matter of them being completely absurd, and unjust.
"Whether and how the government can facilitate the further development of a robust online licensing environment, including access to comprehensive public and private databases of rights information."
- Such a task would be made considerably easier by limiting Copyright duration to a sensible term, such as 5-25 years from the creation date of the work. (I have some interesting ideas about this, and justification for them, but this is not the space for it.)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377029130000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Jamie Fisk
2013-08-20T16:05:30-04:00
2013-08-20T16:05:30-04:00
Copyright law as it stands today will not be possible to carry on into the next century, possibly even the next 20 years. The problem with copyright law is that the same idea can be independently generated, and that the growing population, and the growing percentage of the population that have more access to more information means that there is going to be an increase in simultaneous independent thought generation. Ideas should not be property, especially because of the nature of society and the importance of mimicry. Imagine if the wheel were patented. Now imagine all of the important inventions (laser sintering printers for example) that are going to be necessary for the advancement of the species in the near future. Eventually (and especially when 3d printing is more widespread) people will just start ignoring patent law altogether (as , in my opinion, it should be).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377017481000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
james roe
2013-08-20T12:51:21-04:00
2013-08-20T12:51:21-04:00
Very disappointing that reducing the term of copyright back to 25 years and restoring fair use are not on your list of green paper ideas. If you were actually interested in hearing from the American people and not your bought and paid for corporate bosses than you would be giving both of these ideas a serious review. Copyright was designed to promote cultural creation, now it is being used to maintain corporate rights on products whose creators are long dead.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377017357000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
C G
2013-08-20T12:49:17-04:00
2013-08-20T12:49:17-04:00
Patents & copyrights are broken in the US. The standard should be "give 100 industry people a task to accomplish what the patent does, and if 1 produces something similar to the patent then it is not patentable."
Software patents should be 100% done away with. Math isn't patentable, and computer programs are equivalent to a form of math. Every software patent I have read has been obvious. Patents are death to all but the top software companies who have the money to buy the patents and work cross-licensing deals. As soon as you make money, a troll comes along, wanting your profits for 1+2=3.
Copyrights should be for a reasonable term like 17 years, not extended for 50 years every 49 years just because someone in Washington gets paid under the table.
The government must start abiding by it's own laws (not changing them because a copyright holder with big pockets comes to town wanting to protect his cash cow) and promptly prosecuting office holders who break them.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377017342000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Dr. Robert Stephenson
2013-08-20T12:49:02-04:00
2013-08-20T12:49:02-04:00
I agree entirely with an earlier comment that copyright should be limited to 25 years. Disney's Mickey Mouse copyright extensions are NOT in the public interest. They merely demonstrate the extent to which corporate cash has corrupted our democracy.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377015869000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Greg Webster
2013-08-20T12:24:29-04:00
2013-08-20T12:24:29-04:00
When technological advancements are held hostage because of patents that are locked up and unused (much as the case of powder and liquid forms of 3D printing), there is a severe problem. When these concepts are so broad, no one else can develop new technologies based on them. Really, creating things based on layers of liquid has been around since mud huts. Allow people to control the processes, not the concepts. Reduce the breadth of patents and copyrights.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377009953000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
William B Miller
2013-08-20T10:45:53-04:00
2013-08-20T10:45:53-04:00
This sums up my views. Copyright is fine, but it should be limited in length. If it is not limited in length, then the fines for violations should be shortened in proportion. The following would, I believe, contribute value to the society at large as well as reasonable compensation for the artist, while encouraging creation of new works throughout the artist's lifetime:
1) Please reduce the absurd duration of copyright. We can argue about exactly how long, but anything above 30 years is definitely absurd. Also copyright would be better if anything above 20 years required a substantial payment.
2) Copyright should be non-transferable and belong to the artist producing the work.
3) Please ensure that all private copying from media to media for personal use only is regarded as Fair Use.
4) Commercial Piracy should attract large fines, however small personal acts of piracy should be penalized in the region of a few thousand dollars TOTAL, not several tens of thousands for each work. As an example, Jammie Thomas was definitely guilty, but a maximum fine of about $5,000 would be seen as far more reasonable especially as she made no significant financial gain from the act.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377009382000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Erin M
2013-08-20T10:36:22-04:00
2013-08-20T10:36:22-04:00
My thought of an option that would make everyone mostly happy:
Initial copyright term: 25 years
Renewal: 75$, every 5 years
Can renew indefinitely
That way, orphan works move quickly to the public domain, but Disney can stop messing with copyright law.
There would need to be an online registry of all books under copyright, which would need to be publicly accessible in order to find the copyright status of any work.
The cost of renewal could be adjusted. Its main purpose is to create some tiny barrier to renewing forever, so that a work that is earning the copyright owner very little will not be worth renewing forever, but should be low enough that it isn't a problem for an owner who wants to keep their book for a longer time if they want to.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377009361000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Steve McGrew
2013-08-20T10:36:01-04:00
2013-08-20T10:36:01-04:00
I hold three registered copyrights (one of which I just sent a week ago, same email as here), and would like to point out that art is like technology, in that everything new comes from the old, "if I see farther than others it's because I stand on the shoulders of giants." Imagine how technology would stagnate if patents lasted so long? That's how art is stagnating.
Also, any noncommercial use should be legal. I, for one, want EVEYONE to read my new book whether or not they pay me. I don't pay to read a library book!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377008625000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Alex
2013-08-20T10:23:45-04:00
2013-08-20T10:23:45-04:00
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for LIMITED TIMES* to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. -- 1787 (Article I, Section 8, Clause 8)
* 14 years since the Statute of Anne, 1710.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377007588000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Matthew
2013-08-20T10:06:28-04:00
2013-08-20T10:06:28-04:00
5. The new streaming legislation is a joke. There are so many ways it can be abused that the drafters should be deported. Stop letting uninformed people draft reactionary legislation.
6. DRM is a menace. Any company who creates products with it should be forced to send removal tools to all subscribers on dissolution. Walmart, Microsoft and others have axed DRM-encrusted services and subsequently closed them, robbing consumers.
7. A public license database could be created, but frankly, the government is far too incompetent to tackle this seriously. Given your track record in understanding, much less controlling, these issues, I'd rather you stay away from it. Quite likely, you'd just use it to start spying on computer users, so no company, much less user, is going to trust you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377007470000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Matthew
2013-08-20T10:04:30-04:00
2013-08-20T10:04:30-04:00
3. First sale doctrine will always be relevant. You cannot sell someone a license to use software or music and then place restrictions on what they do with it. The people who want this axed are people who want consumers to buy the same product multiple times on multiple services.
4. DMCA takedowns should either be removed completely, or companies should be punished with huge fines for invalid takedowns, because companies are issuing takedowns for content that isn't theirs to stifle competition and critique. Each false takedown should be at least a $100,000 fine, going directly into a fund for establishing national fiber. Thus, companies will be forced to improve their systems to not remove others' content. If companies have the legal obligation to police their own service, then companies have the legal obligation to not falsely claim infringement.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377007104000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Matthew
2013-08-20T09:58:24-04:00
2013-08-20T09:58:24-04:00
1. No software should be patentable. Nor computer hardware, as patents stifle innovation, and you're granting them on the most inane things. You're not capable of judging the worth of the patents, so trust people in the industry who tell you to just get rid of them. Innovation in computers is far too quick for patents, as something that's innovative one year is commonplace, or even outdated the next. What distinguishes companies is the level of their service.
2. Damages for individual infringement should be limited to double the cost of the infringement. Companies should be forced to show proof that the user themselves infringed, and an IP address is not sufficient. *Commercial* infringement (not "Large-scale infringement", but people who are selling others' copyrighted material) should have huge damages. The only difference in the level of damages should be if you're selling the product.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377007058000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Sam
2013-08-20T09:57:38-04:00
2013-08-20T09:57:38-04:00
I have a few comments regarding copyright and its abuse. First, why should we introduce artificial value for digital goods? The answer to that question will lead to a natural discussion of how much artificial value is appropriate. The current environment attempts to place entirely too much artificial value on digital goods and is the reason why this discussion is taking place. Second, sharing is not evil and should not be demonized or criminalized through legislation. Sharing is not synonymous with stealing and no amount of laws or propaganda will convince me otherwise. Content creators should stop focusing on what they cannot control (sharing of content between consumers) and start focusing on what they can control (live performances, tangible products tied to their content, etc). Last, let private industry (this includes content creation) succeed or fail on its own merits. Content creation is not a new industry but is notorious for abusing government power to ensure success. This should end.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377006972000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
felixvulgaris
2013-08-20T09:56:12-04:00
2013-08-20T09:56:12-04:00
Reigning in the abusive use of DMCA takedown notices and removing penalties for circumventing digital locks are essential if we want to move forward with a progressive copyright system. No consequences for misusing takedown notices only sets up an easy, government supported censorship system. Legal penalties for altering or upgrading a device that I paid for is just indefensible. If it's not mine to open and tinker with, then it's not mine at all. What exactly am I paying for when I buy a device that I can't alter?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377006053000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Scott Mitting
2013-08-20T09:40:53-04:00
2013-08-20T09:40:53-04:00
I feel the duration of modern copyright does not meet the stated purpose: the advancement of useful knowledge and discoveries. It almost seems like the entire nature is for the creator's profit rather than the common good, which is the antithesis of its original purpose.
Also, we need legislation to decide the issue of samples in music, as leaving it up the courts has left the issue too uncertain. It seems ridiculous that someone isn't permitted to use a processed 2 second sample of some music in entirely novel ways, but it also seems ridiculous to not pay the original artists for their samples in some music where they are essentially repeating a prior work with a new beat. The terms of engagement here need a clear definition.
The current state of software copyright and patents involve people gaining long-term monopolies over creations that are obvious to anyone who is a developer. If the USPTO is not willing to hire software developers who can recognize this, I don't understand why ANY software patents are granted.
As someone who has earned a living at different times from multiple industries that involve copyright (software and music composition) it would seem to be obvious that I should be in favor of strong copyrights, but as the system currently stands I'd be more in favor of tossing the whole thing out.
Just my two cents.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377004910000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
David Piepgrass
2013-08-20T09:21:50-04:00
2013-08-20T09:21:50-04:00
Every single copyright extension since the original 14-28 year term has been retroactive: lobbyists are not much interested in extending copyright to encourage new works. But how does a retroactive extension meet the constitution's requirement "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"? I would like to (1) have the 95-year copyright vastly reduced, (2) liability should be reduced in most cases, and (3) locating copyright holders can be difficult; if the markings on the work itself cannot locate the current copyright holder to ask permission to use (e.g. due to death of author), liability should be impossible until the copyright is registered with some central authority.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377001531000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Su
2013-08-20T08:25:31-04:00
2013-08-20T08:25:31-04:00
I'd be more than willing to provide my input, including an actionable plan and reasonable neutrality. However, I feel this forum (comments on a webpage) is inadequate. If the USPTO would care to provide either a mailing address or an email address, I'd be happy to send a document.
Please respond here and to the provided email address. Thanks,
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377001185000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Randy Saunders
2013-08-20T08:19:45-04:00
2013-08-20T08:19:45-04:00
I think it's great that you want to hear from stakeholders, but 1000 character responses to you 100+ page paper seem a little asymmetric. What are your real plans to collect comments "energetically and productively"? Might make good thing to close the blog entry with a link to.
Copyrights and patents need to be sufficient to motivate creators to share their results. While patents may have balance issues, particularly with software, copyrights are completely out of balance. What does it mean to "buy" a copy of a copyrighted work, in the digital world? An IEEE group has been studying this for over a year, and yet you've never contacted them. Lobbying by rights holders, seeking the right to make money forever from the same idea, ultimately discourages creativity. Consumers label copyright holders, large and small, with the "powerful media empire" image -- and steal copyrighted works in large quantities. That hurts the small author, and that's exactly the reaction that large licensing firms desire. We effectively have a two-tier copyright system: a few copyrights are held by large companies and defended over-zealously, hurting everyone's public image; and most copyrights aren't worth the cost of filing a free form, because of a lack of viable monitization channels.
If Mickey Mouse is the only thing you're trying to protect with copyright law, it would be better to just repeal all the copyright laws and replace them with "Thou shallt not copy Mickey Mouse". If you're looking for a more balanced law, you should contemplate massive overhaul. How likely does that seem to you??
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377000367000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Nicolas Dufour
2013-08-20T08:06:07-04:00
2013-08-20T08:06:07-04:00
This document is interesting but you failed to tackle the main problem above all: the actual duration of the copyright. Originally set to 14 years renewable just once to now close to a century, it's probably the most ridiculous and obsolete part of it. You've talked of balancing copyright for the great of everybody: well here you failed to balance its duration. You *have* to come back to 14 years. It IS the first and foremost step!
The second point that you forget again blatantly is to repeat that copyright is never EVER a right given to the author but a *privilege* granted to it. Why is it important? Because it means it's less important than just rights (like freedom of speech, etc...) and therefore any laws about enforcing copyright should *always* withdraw themselves face to actual rights.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1377000015000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Jacob Lama
2013-08-20T08:00:15-04:00
2013-08-20T08:00:15-04:00
Lengthy copyright terms errode innovation. Also, attempting to stop piracy is not a viable solution. Offer consumers the ability to access content online at a reasonable price with limited or no restrictions, and the money will follow.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376998942000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
michael daniec
2013-08-20T07:42:22-04:00
2013-08-20T07:42:22-04:00
please end this insanity of methods patents, software patents and copyrights
it is an disgrace to out country that poses severe handicaps to our economic development and well being by stifling innovation and technological progress in every industry and scientific endeavor
only the exploiters of our legal system for personal advantage stand to gain from continuing the status quo
we must abolish all methods patents and all trivial patenting of obvious tweaks to established processes
the human body and its fundamental biological processes, for one, should be declared off limits to patents, as a fundamental human right
scientific discovery and extending human knowledge should never be a patents opportunity
our future depends on a rational patenting system that reflects the fundamental purposes for which it was developed, the extension of human endeavors not their limiting and the greater public good rather than private enrichment by the few
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376997611000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Norm Paulsen
2013-08-20T07:20:11-04:00
2013-08-20T07:20:11-04:00
Foremost, I would like to point out current copyright laws have criminalized most of the country. The first thought would be to move in a direction that doesn't make every citizen a criminal.
Secondly, copyright laws were introduced to protect the creators of content, not monopolize content. My point is, the length of copyrights, needs to be drastically reduced, at minimum, to the death of the creator. Personally, I'd like to see it set up as death of the creator/20 years, whichever occurs first.
Lastly, break up the monopolies of creative content, who are currently directing copyright legislation through lobbying. One possible way, don't assign copyrights to corporations. Allow licenses to be sold to companies from the copyright holder, but never as an exclusive license.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376996058000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Christopher Goff
2013-08-20T06:54:18-04:00
2013-08-20T06:54:18-04:00
I feel that the current copyright system has fallen prey to litigation companies that produce nothing, yet hold entire industries hostage. It is causing the United States to lose it's competitive advantage in many areas. This is a policy failure, and unless the USPTO acts, this country will fall behind as others such as China and India forge ahead ignoring some of the idiotic patent rules that do nothing other than to stifle innovation.
I support a rewriting of copyright rules that would ensure innovation remains a possibility here instead of forcing companies to develop and create their products overseas.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376995085000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
anthony garza
2013-08-20T06:38:05-04:00
2013-08-20T06:38:05-04:00
unfair license agreements can and should be overturned. do not allow any content creator use any terms they see fit. they have already demonstrated bias in their favor that gives them unprecedented control over a consumer's property(namely their computers) that they didn't have before the extremely broad DMCA. they have shown they are willing to prosecute children, for the sake of boosting their profit margin. you are responsible for this.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376994859000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Travelsonic
2013-08-20T06:34:19-04:00
2013-08-20T06:34:19-04:00
The penalties currently in place, if I recall, were not intended for individuals who share works illegally. We need two sets of penalties - one for companies [maybe even sliding to adjust for the company size], and one for the consumer much, much smaller than what they say now. $250k per infringement maximum for an individual is absolutely INSANE, period.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376993963000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Hatta
2013-08-20T06:19:23-04:00
2013-08-20T06:19:23-04:00
Abolish copyright. Supply and demand make copyright completely unworkable in the digital age. When the marginal cost of a good is zero, the marginal price of that good will be zero. You cannot legislate around basic laws of economics. It's time for artists to find other ways to monetize their time and skills.
The only alternative to aboliton of copyright will be a war on copyright infringement that will destroy our liberties. And the Copyright hawks will still lose, just like they lost the war on drugs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376993598000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Robert Noack
2013-08-20T06:13:18-04:00
2013-08-20T06:13:18-04:00
I think the government's time would be better spent creating laws which force content creators and copyright holders to use fair pricing and timed release models. Whether or not anti-piracy groups or the government, or the copyright holders themselves want to admit it, a large part of piracy and the kind that causes the most "counted damages" (lets not discuss if those would actually translate to direct sales eventually or not) come from those who either don't have access to content because they live somewhere it's not shown, work at a time it's not show (for movies/tv), or the price is often so high that no one except large corporations can afford it (for a lot of software). My days of piracy are over but when I was younger I had no means to obtain software such as Visual Studio, etc. which I needed in order to learn programming and become a software developer. I don't think that the creators of this software (Microsoft) would have cared if a middle school student stole their software and now became a contributing member of society who buys every update to the software now that they can afford it. Hardening piracy laws is not the solution, because it inhibits learning. First we need to ensure people have access to content and the ability to learn for a fair price. Then we can work on blocking access to illegal content more.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376992604000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Trevin Beattie
2013-08-20T05:56:44-04:00
2013-08-20T05:56:44-04:00
I would exhort the IPTF to read “Against Intellectual Monopoly” by Boldrin & Levine, UCLA, 2008.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376992181000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Howard Cohen
2013-08-20T05:49:41-04:00
2013-08-20T05:49:41-04:00
I invent things all the time -- it is my job. There is simply no way to avoid inventing things others have already invented. There are only so many ways to do basic things. By allowing patents on these ideas my job ceases to be inventing and all my efforts could be undone by someone who builds nothing but who convinced someone else their ideas were unique. Performance is measured by results: if you aren't usng a patent, you should lose it. What is more, the standard for software patents should be at the level of applications: not algorithms. Until that change, we live in the dark ages of software engineering where I and others like me are persecuted for merely thinking creatively.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376992054000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Brett Kelford
2013-08-20T05:47:34-04:00
2013-08-20T05:47:34-04:00
An argument can be made that digital information does not degrade over time. However, computer hardware, operating systems and other technologies change over time, so the digital works which depend on those technologies effectively have a finite lifetime. So, the usefulness of digital information degrades over time.
License agreements are too much of a burden on the end-user. Companies ought to pay a tax of 1% of their profits on that product for every 1000 words in their license agreements.
People get bored waiting for trials in jury duty. They should be able to log on to a kiosk and serve as jurors in copyright lawsuits.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376988951000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Michael Keller
2013-08-20T04:55:51-04:00
2013-08-20T04:55:51-04:00
1) Eliminate the DMCA. It is, simply put, terrible legislation. According to the Constitution, power rests with the people, not corporations. And with the DMCA, there is no due process, a further violation of basic rights.
2) Limit copyright to short terms, no more than a third of a normal lifetime, so that orphan works can be preserved, not locked up. If copyright simply must be extended, make it nearly as expensive as the profits that might be generated from the work.
3) Eliminate criminal penalties and limit monetary penalties for small copyright infringement.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376988545000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Dr. Brenton Chapin
2013-08-20T04:49:05-04:00
2013-08-20T04:49:05-04:00
Public libraries should be allowed to go fully digital. Would save us taxpayers a lot of money, and make the local library much, much better. No more expense of housing a very limited collection of physical media, and tracking borrowings. No need for returns. No more loss from damage to physical media. Card catalogs are a poor second to computer searchability.
I think copyright should be abolished. I believe copyright law is the biggest impediment to the vision of digital public libraries for everyone.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376988539000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Andrew Banks
2013-08-20T04:48:59-04:00
2013-08-20T04:48:59-04:00
- Copyright should not be onerous for the average citizen.
- Copyright is explicitly for the public good, as spelled out by the Constitution.
- Imagine copyright reduced to zero, simulate the effect on "the Progress of Science and useful Arts," and slowly add back copyright only as much as needed.
- As a filmmaker and programmer for decades, whom many have called "creative," I can attest that everything is a remix anyway (http://everythingisaremix.info/watch-the-series/), so artists should not be protected at the expense of other interests of people
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376987969000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Sean Darrenkamp
2013-08-20T04:39:29-04:00
2013-08-20T04:39:29-04:00
I'm not holding my breath for reform. Still 25 to 30 years tops for patents and copyrights retroactively should be the order of the day. Anything else is just feeding in to mega corporations who are constantly merging under smaller roofs till some day it will just be one global company running everything.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376987450000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Ron Woodward
2013-08-20T04:30:50-04:00
2013-08-20T04:30:50-04:00
Copyright has grown too long and is restricting creativity. We need to add progressive renewal taxes to extend copy rights. Original copy right for 10 years is free. Each 10 year extension is taxed at a percent of sales that escalates. So the second 10 year copyright is taxed at 10% of sales. The third 10 years is taxed at 20% of sales. Copyright can be maintained indefinitely however taxes would be 100% of sales after 100years. No criminal penalties for copyright infringement. No one should face jail for making a copy. No penalties for downloading anything offered for free on the internet. Down loaders do not have possession of original works required to make copies. ISPs must maintain ID information on all uploaders. Not being able to produce uploader ID information makes ISPs liable for any infringement. Uploaders however are liable to governement for 2 x the copyright tax and to the copyright holder for 2x the selling price for all downloaded copies plus legal fees if found to have violated the copyright. Copyright holders or government may bring suite however if they loose they must pay the defendants legal fees. Strengthen first sale rules by making it Illegal to encumber digital media with digital rights management locking media to one machine or location.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376987157000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Matt Kuhns
2013-08-20T04:25:57-04:00
2013-08-20T04:25:57-04:00
Priority number one should be restoring a robust and growing public domain.
Once upon a time, adding valuable content to the public domain was seen as enrichment of us all, and a contribution to posterity; today it's too often regarded as nothing more than "lost revenue" for legacy copyright-holders. This needs to change.
It's absurd that we are to the point where even the Library of Congress is reduced to attaching "use at your own risk" disclaimers to parts of its collection, even 150-year-old photographs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376984053000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
drakaan
2013-08-20T03:34:13-04:00
2013-08-20T03:34:13-04:00
First, why is the USPTO soliciting input related to changes in copyright? Aside from "software shouldn't be patented, it should be protected by copyright like other written works", I can't think of anything useful to say about copyright where the USPTO would be involved.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376982802000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Oliver Knill
2013-08-20T03:13:22-04:00
2013-08-20T03:13:22-04:00
A good copy right law optimizes productivity, creativity, innovation and education. It should allow a company to protect
their creation for a limited time so that investments are worth
wile. Copy right is necessary to assure that content producers
like artists, writers or scientists get compensated.
Copy right should never go beyond the life time of the
persons having created the art or science. For example, books of authors who are no more alive need to be in the common domain. Fair use policies are needed, especially when the work is
used for nonprofit work or education.
Common ground procedures like mathematical results or basic
mechanics like exchanging information or algorithms or objects
created by nature like plants or genes should not be under
any copy right rule.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376982772000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Kris Tilford
2013-08-20T03:12:52-04:00
2013-08-20T03:12:52-04:00
Copyright is too long, it should be absolutely limited to the lifetime of the creator, and never longer than 10-20 years maximum. This concept that Mickey Mouse is still under copyright until 105 years after creation is insane, a sign of the corruption of our corporate government. Money buys copyright law. This "we want to hear from you" is useless lip service.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376978544000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Tom Wels
2013-08-20T02:02:24-04:00
2013-08-20T02:02:24-04:00
The current copyright duration is too short. Other forms of property like real estate and trademark have much longer duration of protections. Similarly, copyright law should be modified to give the same level of protection, that is, indefinite copyright protection to authors/owners of copyrighted content. The rationale for the current duration (life+x years) should also be explained (how did they arrive at this duration)?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376246243000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Chris Denny
2013-08-11T14:37:23-04:00
2013-08-11T14:37:23-04:00
I tweeted I thought making illegal streaming a felony, after I hear the news. I very much stand by that statement, because ultimately it doesn't solve the problem. Another parent and his/her child will made an example by some large corporation in a courtroom in their effort to stop something that isn't stoppable as long as computers, or the internet exist. The average household can't afford lawyer fees for an over zealous company trying to make a statement because their 12 year old was sharing a video of some Nintendo game play with their buddy. Making available the means of licensing a video or software to share with other people (which is what they want to do anyways) controlled by the content creator on different platforms creates a middle ground that should be fair to both parties, as long as the content creators are fair about it.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376143760000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Richard R. Zdeb
2013-08-10T10:09:20-04:00
2013-08-10T10:09:20-04:00
I feel that anyone sending information via internet to a recipient by e-mail that holds information to what is not yet trade marked or copy written should first take their work to a notary and have it stamped and dated for confirmation of authentication of the author by the date stamped on his material. A wittiness's signature also notarized on that date would also be an added protection factor for the author or inventor prior to submitting his work. [Notarize your work prior to showing or sharing with anyone!]
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376133707000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Law Offices of M. E. Cavanaugh
2013-08-10T07:21:47-04:00
2013-08-10T07:21:47-04:00
Copyright is massively abused. The term of copyright should be limited, preferably to 25 years from publication, with no exceptions.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/we_want_to_hear_from#comment-1376068414000
Re: We Want to Hear from You on Copyright Policies in the Digital Economy
Ginger Brooks
2013-08-09T13:13:34-04:00
2013-08-09T13:13:34-04:00
I am in full support of your mission and want to thank you for addressing this issue.
Ginger Brooks
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/happy_anniversary_detroit#comment-1374738910000
Re: Happy Anniversary, Detroit
ChrisWhewell
2013-07-25T03:55:10-04:00
2013-07-25T03:55:10-04:00
Please be sure to keep us apprised of when that first patent is issued based out of examination thru the Detroit satellite!! Wouldn't it be neat-o , if such patent were Automotive related ?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_our_dallas#comment-1374564057000
Re: An Update on Our Dallas, Denver, and Silicon Valley Offices
Mary Jacob
2013-07-23T03:20:57-04:00
2013-07-23T03:20:57-04:00
In terms of local outreach programs including training, STEM workshops and building relationships with local innovators, universities, etc, I think the USPTO would benefit significantly from the experienced Patent Examiners that are now hoteling all around the country and may be interested in getting out of their home offices to do outreach for the PTO in their local cities. Personally living in the Albany, NY area, I have access to SUNY schools, engineering schools such as Rensselaer Polytechnic Institure, childrens' science museums, and companies/universities that are investing in nanotechnology and other sciences (Global Foundaries and General Electric are examples that have local presence). I think cities like this that are investing time and money into developing sciences would be great places for the USPTO to have a presence and the USPTO may already have people in those locations that may be willing to help with outreach programs.
Mary Jacob
Primary Examiner, AU2123
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing_the_global_patent_search#comment-1374030538000
Re: Announcing the Global Patent Search Network - Chinese Patent Documentation
Hans Geelback Andersen
2013-07-16T23:08:58-04:00
2013-07-16T23:08:58-04:00
This might be a very useful search tool and I would like to try it.
But where is the link to the Global Patent Search Network / Chinese Patent Documentation ?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_implementation_of_the_2013#comment-1371748510000
Re: USPTO Implementation of the 2013 Joint Strategic Plan for Intellectual Property Enforcement
Paul T. Lee
2013-06-20T13:15:10-04:00
2013-06-20T13:15:10-04:00
Dear Acting Director Rea,
I am glad to see that the capacity-building programs in the US and around the world via GIPA are underlined in your statement of the 2013 Joint Strategic Plan. I think this role of USPTO should be strongly maintained as a leader of world IP, which provides the US with a good source of leading power. Neither the Sequester nor other minor obstacles should be any blocsfor these programs. I respectfully and strongly recommend reconsidering the recent policy changes to reduce GIPA's support for the international cooperative training programs. I am sure this type of training supports could be a one of the best policies of USPTO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_s_global_intellectual_property#comment-1371738138000
Re: USPTOβs Global Intellectual Property Academy Continues to Advance IP Awareness and Respect At Home and Abroad
Janette Brown
2013-06-20T10:22:18-04:00
2013-06-20T10:22:18-04:00
The Global IP Academy offers a wealth of materials to the public. We currently offer seven distance learning modules on all areas of intellectual property protection and enforcement, including: Patent Protection; Introduction to the Patent Cooperation Treaty; International Standards for the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights; Trade and Property Rights; Overview of Trademarks; Geographical Indications; and Copyright: Encouraging and Protecting Creativity. They are available in English, Spanish, French, Arabic, and Russian and can be accessed any time, day or night, for no charge at the following site: http://www.uspto.gov/ip/training/elearn.jsp. The Academy also maintains a public database which contains information about and materials from past and upcoming programs. That database can be found at usipr.uspto.gov. In addition, there is an online Intellectual Property Training Module on the STOPfakes.gov website (www.stopfakes.gov). This tutorial covers all facets of intellectual property protection and enforcement and includes a simple intellectual property "needs assessment" tool. It was developed by the Office of Intellectual Property Rights (OIPR)/International Trade Administration/U.S. Department of Commerce, the Small Business Administration, and the USPTO. The Academy works closely with the OIPR, which administers the STOPfakes.gov website, to identify and provide intellectual property educational materials for small business on the site. Aside from all of this information, many of the Academy’s in-person programs are open to the public. We often hold roadshows and other types of intellectual property awareness campaigns throughout the United States in an effort to bring our in-person training and assistance to those who may not be able to visit us here in Alexandria, Virginia. During those roadshows and campaigns, we build in time for one-on-one consultations so that we can answer questions that participants may not have had a chance to ask during the programs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/global_classification_and_the_uspto#comment-1371566055000
Re: Global Classification and the USPTO
John C. Thompson
2013-06-18T10:34:15-04:00
2013-06-18T10:34:15-04:00
I am opposed to limiting the examiner's search only to CPC. My personal experience when searching in the mechanical fields is that a single classification is not always the best. Thus, differing criteria are used in different classification systems. No single classification system is best.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_s_global_intellectual_property#comment-1371500818000
Re: USPTOβs Global Intellectual Property Academy Continues to Advance IP Awareness and Respect At Home and Abroad
Harris Brotman
2013-06-17T16:26:58-04:00
2013-06-17T16:26:58-04:00
Are the materials presented at the Global IP Academy for 'expanding educational, technical assistance, and capacity-building on IP issues' available to the public?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/hack_for_change#comment-1371488863000
Re: Hack for Change
Michelle Koeth
2013-06-17T13:07:43-04:00
2013-06-17T13:07:43-04:00
For anyone in the Northern Virginia area who is interested in participating in a National Day of Civic Hacking project, or otherwise getting involved in civic hacking, please visit www.codefornova.org - an all volunteer led meetup group which meets weekly in Arlington County, VA to work on such exciting projects. It's a great way to give back to your local community using your technical skills, and it's very exciting to get support for civic hacking from our own Acting Director Teresa Stanek Rea!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_chapter_for_protection#comment-1368452567000
Re: A New Chapter for Protection of Industrial Design for the United States
David R. Gerk, Patent Attorney, Office of Policy and External Affairs, USPTO
2013-05-13T09:42:47-04:00
2013-05-13T09:42:47-04:00
Currently, there is yet to be a specific set date with respect to when the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement will go into force in the United States. The Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012 (PLTIA) was signed into law by President Obama on December 18, 2012. Title I of the PLTIA concerning the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement sets forth an effective date of the later of “(1) the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act” or “(2) the date of entry into force of the treaty with respect to the United States.” As such, the Hague Agreement related provisions of the PLTIA will go into effect either December 18, 2013, or if at that time the Hague Agreement is not yet in force in the United States, the date [whenever that may be] upon which the treaty enters into force in the United States. While the United States has signed the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement, pursuant to the Articles of the Treaty it still needs to submit its instrument of ratification with the International Bureau (WIPO) before it becomes a member and the treaty enters into force in the United States. (Article 27 of the Geneva Act) Finally, the Treaty will take effect with respect to the United States three months after the United States deposits its instrument of ratification or at any later date indicated in that instrument [the instrument of ratification]. (Article 28 of the Geneva Act)
The USPTO and others in the U.S. Government are actively working to facilitate implementation of the Hague Agreement. Among the steps in this process is the development of a rule package and a request for public comment on that proposed rule package. To the extent you are interested in the proposed rules with respect to U.S. implementation of the Hague Agreement, continue to monitor the Federal Register. It may be noteworthy that implementation of the Hague Agreement is not solely a United States endeavor as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the administrator of the Treaty, also plays a vital role in implementation. Adding to the complexity of the implementation process is the fact that the United States will likely be the first large substantive examination design office to join the Treaty and thus some provisions of the Treaty are being addressed for the very first time.
While the Hague system aims to simplify for applicants the filing and pursuit of design protection in member states, the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement was drafted to specifically accommodate not only design registration systems but also design patent systems and their substantive examination process and criteria. As such, the United States will continue to be able to substantively examine Hague applications pursuant to Title 35 including sections 102, 103, 112 etc.
Moving on to another topic, the USPTO will accept design applications from both U.S. and foreign citizens alike.
-David R. Gerk, Patent Attorney, Office of Policy and External Affairs, USPTO
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_chapter_for_protection#comment-1366404919000
Re: A New Chapter for Protection of Industrial Design for the United States
Tom Schneck
2013-04-19T16:55:19-04:00
2013-04-19T16:55:19-04:00
Is it correct that foreign applicants will still have to comply with Sec. 112 disclosure requirements for design cases in the U.S? These requirements often involve enhanced drawings compared to drawings typically filed in Europe or Asia. Alternatively, will drawing requirements be relaxed for Hague applications entering the U.S. as a national stage from foreign countries?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/empowering_current_and_future_ip#comment-1365554731000
Re: Empowering Current and Future IP Attorneys
soch ngo
2013-04-09T20:45:31-04:00
2013-04-09T20:45:31-04:00
Nice informative post,thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/examiner_training_continues_on_first#comment-1363882320000
Re: Examiner Training Continues on First Inventor to File
Lawrence S. Cohen
2013-03-21T12:12:00-04:00
2013-03-21T12:12:00-04:00
I am pleased to read that the PTO is doing a good job of training examiners, writing new rules and giving briefings in person and on line. Good job. But it still annoys me to read the virtually unacceptable propaganda about how good FITF is and how "harmonization" is a good idea. I know the debate is over, but it is still widely held that there never was a need for this harmonization, it was a surrender of our principle that the act of invention should be the controlling event, not the commencement of a bureaucratic procedure. Yesterday I turned away my first inquiry for a patent because the inventor had been selling it for a few months. Needless to say, the “big guys” who can plan patent programs around their business get to be OK, but individuals don’t have the leeway nor are they informed about the destruction of their right to patents by activities that used to be graced.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/examiner_training_continues_on_first#comment-1363777844000
Re: Examiner Training Continues on First Inventor to File
Carla
2013-03-20T07:10:44-04:00
2013-03-20T07:10:44-04:00
Will PTO offer training to non-agency employees who are interested in learning more about this new patent law?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1363172166000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Corp Counsel
2013-03-13T06:56:06-04:00
2013-03-13T06:56:06-04:00
From a practitioner perspective, a big driver of the first RCE is that the second office action is almost always made final. When a first response presents amendments and arguments, the examiner should not automatically be able to make the rejection final on based new art. Doing so forces applicant to file an RCE if amendments are necessary to address the newly presented rejections. One solution in such cases would be to provide applicant with the option for an after-final interview and a follow-up response (i.e., the interview serves to withdraw finality of the office action) as an alternative to filing an RCE. This would allow an applicant to expeditiously advance the application toward allowance and would also enable the examiner to get counts for an interview to compensate for the lost counts from no RCE.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_chapter_for_protection#comment-1363015393000
Re: A New Chapter for Protection of Industrial Design for the United States
John Dale
2013-03-11T11:23:13-04:00
2013-03-11T11:23:13-04:00
As a British citizen, do i need to have special permission to file for a design patent and a utility patent in the United States?
Where can I obtain legal information about this?
It would be for a plain and simple indoor feline toy.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1362504401000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
JohnQpractitioner
2013-03-05T12:26:41-05:00
2013-03-05T12:26:41-05:00
I understand that some companies are starting to institute a policy whereby they file an RCE after receiving a Notice of Allowance, stripping out elements from the claims without comment about the references or the previous references and rejections by the Examiner. Lazy Examiner's in turn are allowing these cases with almost no review. What is going on here? When an Applicant files an RCE after a Notice of Allowance for reasons other than filing an IDS, are they hoodwinking the Examiner whose eye is not on the ball at this stage of the prosecution? IT is clear the level of scrutiny diops to almost zero when an RCE is filed after allowance, and the USPTO must not allow Applicants to merely strip elements or broaden without specific comment as to why the previous rejection is not applicable to the new version of the claims.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_chapter_for_protection#comment-1362496885000
Re: A New Chapter for Protection of Industrial Design for the United States
Mitchell Rossman
2013-03-05T10:21:25-05:00
2013-03-05T10:21:25-05:00
When will you be rolling out this process? My clients are very interested in using this procedure. Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_chapter_for_protection#comment-1362469842000
Re: A New Chapter for Protection of Industrial Design for the United States
Kitty BALL
2013-03-05T02:50:42-05:00
2013-03-05T02:50:42-05:00
What date or when does the Single International design application come into force? Where and when can individuals file for it? For an individual person, how much does it cost? Are there renewal fees? How long does it last? If an individual person has already filed for a US design patent how can this be changed to a Single International design patent application for an individual person? What countries and territories does it cover? Please tell me where I can find more concrete legal information and costs about the Single internatinoal design application. Very much appreciate your help. Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_chapter_for_protection#comment-1362213781000
Re: A New Chapter for Protection of Industrial Design for the United States
James Porcelli
2013-03-02T03:43:01-05:00
2013-03-02T03:43:01-05:00
If I recall correctly, this will go into effect in Decamber of this year. When will additional implementation information be available?
Thanks,
Jim Porcelli
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1361906018000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Tom Duong
2013-02-26T14:13:38-05:00
2013-02-26T14:13:38-05:00
Currently, there is no DM credit for working on RCE. To reduce the backlog in RCE cases, advise the applicant not file an RCE after final but file as a continuation. In this way, we can reduce the RCE backlog and RCE now filed as continuation will get priority under the current DM system.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1361434866000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Larry Sternbane
2013-02-21T03:21:06-05:00
2013-02-21T03:21:06-05:00
RCEs currently go on the "Continuing New" docket. Say I allow a case. Next week, applicant files a continuation. It goes on my "Continuing New" docket along with the RCEs. But because that continuation case may claim priority to an old parent case, it floats to the top of the docket. The RCEs just sit there and get pushed down the stack. Since we are incented to work on new cases, and only the very oldest of those on the "Continuing New" docket, the RCEs just sit there and don't get worked on at all. It seems to me that a continuation case, being a NEW case, after all, should not be prioritized over an existing case like an RCE. Perhaps RCEs should have their own docket with a separate docket management prioritization. Or the "Continuing New" docket should be prioritized by filing date of the RCE / CON case itself, instead of the filing date of the parent. That way, first in, first out. Right now, its kind of last in, first out.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1361274403000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Paul D'Agostino
2013-02-19T06:46:43-05:00
2013-02-19T06:46:43-05:00
I see RCEs coming from two domains: a) chilling legislation such as McKesson v Bridge and b) gamesmanship in claim breadth. For the former, I might suggest that the USPTO provide a press release interpreting cases such as McKesson and assuring applicants that we have systems the already notify examiners on US copending applications. To be safe Applicant's can signal in the ADS of copending apps further alerting the examiner to be diligent to review copending information. On the latter, we need to develop a "score" that we introduce in the first office action that indicates to applicant the breadth of his claims. Lower scores would be highly correlated to a higher probability of RCE. Higher scores - highly correlated with optimal compact prosecution. Happy to provide feedback to make either point operational.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1360936037000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Fritz Fleming
2013-02-15T08:47:17-05:00
2013-02-15T08:47:17-05:00
I think a contributing factor may be the way in which the oldest applications are selected for DM credit on the CON docket. If no RCEs are in the top three, it would appear that working RCEs out of turn provides no DM credit. Perhaps offering a zero day count for RCEs would help in moving them out. On the other hand a COPA like (maybe CORA for clearing out RCE applications) corps wide bonus and program could also assist in moving them promptly.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1360924159000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
William Nixon
2013-02-15T05:29:19-05:00
2013-02-15T05:29:19-05:00
I saw a suggestion that I like on the FB page. For the first RCE, have an expedited docket to keep prosecution moving. I have two applications where the Examiner and my clients have agreed to allowable language but needed to file an RCE to have the amendments considered. Now, we are waiting an extended period essentially to receive a Notice of Allowance. In one case, it has been well over two years. The Examiner claims that his hands are tied by his docket so he cannot consider the application or enter an Examiner's amendment! I would think moving these cases along would be a priority to reduce backlog. Thus, please have some provision for quick review of cases that are in condition for allowance, but were filed as RCEs to have the amendments considered.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1360858797000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Scott Anderson
2013-02-14T11:19:57-05:00
2013-02-14T11:19:57-05:00
I suspect one huge reason for the increase in RCE filings is the time it takes to get an appeal heard at PTAB. Since we give applicants multiple ways to proceed after a final rejection, if one backs up another will start to become more popular.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1360838056000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Scott Zare
2013-02-14T05:34:16-05:00
2013-02-14T05:34:16-05:00
1st RCE goes on Examiner's Amended Docket (must move in 28 days, like they were a couple years back) and Examiner is credited 1.25 counts for First-Action - 2nd and subsequent RCEs sit on Continuing New Docket like they are now
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/wanted_your_ideas_and_feedback#comment-1360752995000
Re: Wanted: Your Ideas and Feedback About "RCEs"
Tariq Gbond
2013-02-13T05:56:35-05:00
2013-02-13T05:56:35-05:00
Although I am fairly new, from speaking with other examiners and also seeing the first set of claims from applicants, there is evidence that the applicants plan to go through at least one RCE, especially the larger coorperations ie verizon, comcast, microsoft. There seems to be a trend to claim very broad with missleading verbiage on the first sets of claims. Also from an examiner perspective, if we have more help with the amendments I think it would be much more possible to transition more attention into limiting RCE's the best we can.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_digital_copyright_principles_just#comment-1360110948000
Re: New Digital Copyright Principles Just Published
Edward J. Camillieri
2013-02-05T19:35:48-05:00
2013-02-05T19:35:48-05:00
I just view Mr. John Calvert's educational tapes. I submitted a request to have various types of drawings ( VISUALLY ) placed on his tapes series and also listed accessibility on the PTO's Home Page. I was not sure if the suggestion was sent after I entered Submit, there was no acknowledgement that it was. He has a good thing going.
THANK you
Ed
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working_together_on_chinese_trademark#comment-1359568208000
Re: Working Together on Chinese Trademark Issues
Chris Zhang
2013-01-30T12:50:08-05:00
2013-01-30T12:50:08-05:00
These are positive developments in a murky arena. It is encouraging to see the willingness to cooperate from the two governments of very different legal and belief systems.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interviews_and_patent_quality#comment-1359563859000
Re: Interviews and Patent Quality
Bruce Story
2013-01-30T11:37:39-05:00
2013-01-30T11:37:39-05:00
After reviewing many file wrappers of what I perceived to be strong patents of my competitors, I found that an above average number had had examiner interviews. After that, I recommended to the prosecuting staff that they arrange examiner interviews as often as possible for the more important patent applications. So, my experience completely confirms what your study concludes.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/progress_continues_at_our_four#comment-1359301370000
Re: Progress Continues at our Four Satellite Offices
Wasiu Lawal
2013-01-27T10:42:50-05:00
2013-01-27T10:42:50-05:00
Hello
I would like to know when your office in Dallas would be opening.
Thanks
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/leahy_coons_patents_for_humanity#comment-1359299873000
Re: Proposed Legislation Aims to Boost Patents for Humanity Program
Joshua Frasier
2013-01-27T10:17:53-05:00
2013-01-27T10:17:53-05:00
Will there be submissions for 2013?
Thanks for a great program! - Looking forward to participate in 2013 if possible!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_named_one_of_federal#comment-1359117796000
Re: USPTO Named One of Federal Governmentβs Best Places to Work
John I Lund
2013-01-25T07:43:16-05:00
2013-01-25T07:43:16-05:00
Mr. Kappos and Mr.Stekler:
Kudos to you for the fine work you are doing. I'm a manufacturing engineer and industrial designer, working for a maker of roadway workzone safety equipment. Also teach engineering at night school. I'm the founder of the Ground Floor Inventors Club of Chicago with a small following of area tinkerers, dreamers and innovators. (find us on Meetup) We hear good remarks from fledgling inventors about you guys. Thanks, John I Lund 6,178,676 6,705,796
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/progress_continues_at_our_four#comment-1358436365000
Re: Progress Continues at our Four Satellite Offices
James T. Moore
2013-01-17T10:26:05-05:00
2013-01-17T10:26:05-05:00
Dear Rosalyn:
Thank you for your post. Many of these office locations were chosen in order that we might access an expanded and exceptional talent base, and we know telework is a key piece of the agency’s working arrangements for our employees.
The memo you mention is not agency-wide, and it applies only to the smaller group of Patent Trial and Appeal Board judges who work together on site in Detroit. Additionally, it is not a wholesale ban on telework for the judges located in Detroit. The memo reinforces commitments the Board made to establish a presence in Detroit and help rejuvenate the city and its surrounding communities. As the Detroit office grows in time, telework for judges will undoubtedly become more prevalent.
But the judges currently in place are vitally important to establishing a presence for the Board and beginning the work of advancing prosperity in the community. The memo merely asks the judges to be present in Detroit during their working hours, and asks them to contact their management if relief, via telework, is occasionally needed. No “second-class” working arrangements for the judges are intended; the Board is simply honoring commitments we made to the Detroit community.
Respectfully,
Jay
(James T. Moore,
Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interviews_and_patent_quality#comment-1358418870000
Re: Interviews and Patent Quality
Paul Cole
2013-01-17T05:34:30-05:00
2013-01-17T05:34:30-05:00
In support of what Rory Littleton has said, I can testify that at EPO Oral Proceedings we can often get through more useful work in a morning than would be achieved in 3 or 4 office actions, the reason being that misunderstandings are quickly and amicably cleared up and it becomes possible to focus on essentials.
But it is a long distance from London to Washington. One way around that difficulty would be to set up conference calls with the examiner, the responsible US attorney, his or her European counterpart and possibly one or more of the inventors. Nowadays Skype enables video conference calls to be made, and these could provide a useful and inexpensive substitute for face to face meetings.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interviews_and_patent_quality#comment-1358310703000
Re: Interviews and Patent Quality
Rory Litton
2013-01-15T23:31:43-05:00
2013-01-15T23:31:43-05:00
I think this is a very interesting fact. I know from experience with attending Oral Proceedings in front of the EPO that a face-to-face meeting can resolve misunderstandings and misinterpretations far quicker than continued written exchanges. Perhaps, a policy whereby the U.S. Examiners request Interviews prior to the issuance of Final Office Actions would encourage Applicants to attend these Interviews and ultimately lead to less continuation filings and more high quality granted patents in a shorter timeframe.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/progress_continues_at_our_four#comment-1357713012000
Re: Progress Continues at our Four Satellite Offices
Rosalyn
2013-01-09T01:30:12-05:00
2013-01-09T01:30:12-05:00
Director Kappos, I am sorry to hear you're leaving. You've led great progress but please, before you go, can you explain why telework has been banned in Detroit? (J. Moore memo on the topic issued last week.) Will it not be utilized in Denver, Dallas or the Silicon Valley either? What is the rationale for denying to satellite employees the benefits of technology to improve productivity AND work/life balance? Clearly, telework is a success in Alexandria. Why, then, after searching to find "the best" -- who come to PTO with an embrace of technology and "smart work" -- why establish a "second class" status for those working in satellite offices?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_named_one_of_federal#comment-1357211733000
Re: USPTO Named One of Federal Governmentβs Best Places to Work
Paul Bellacero
2013-01-03T06:15:33-05:00
2013-01-03T06:15:33-05:00
Dear Mr. Kappos,
It is also the easiest and most efficiant government agency.
I handle the trademarking for the company I work for and get quick responses by pleasent personal, includuing the laywers.
Thanks and keep up the good work.
PauloBellacero
Aurora Products
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_status_update_on_use#comment-1355844005000
Re: A Status Update on Use of Third Party Prior Art Submissions and Post-Grant Reviews
John Jamieson
2012-12-18T10:20:05-05:00
2012-12-18T10:20:05-05:00
I am aware of at least one submission in which a non-prior art reference (Wikipedia article) was found acceptable for a third party prior art submission. However, that may have been an error.
Moreover, users should be aware at least regarding third party prior art submissions that "concise statements" had better not be too concise or the entire submission will be denied entry of record. The concise statement for each submitted reference should expressly identify at least one claim and at least one specific element or step of the claim to which the reference is asserted to relevant. The clerk responsible for initially reviewing the submission for acceptibility will not refer to the application claims. Even those references whose relevance to the claims may be apparent on their face to anyone who has read the claims, can be deemed to have failed to comply with the concise statement requirement and the entire submission, including other prior art references, most clearly relevant and properly supported by the concise statement, will be ignored. There is a qualitative requirement to the statements that is NOT disclosed in the PTO filing instructions or the rules themselves.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_status_update_on_use#comment-1355780300000
Re: A Status Update on Use of Third Party Prior Art Submissions and Post-Grant Reviews
Pat Rules
2012-12-17T16:38:20-05:00
2012-12-17T16:38:20-05:00
Are submissions truly limited to "prior art" as the title of your blog entry suggests? I thought any information of potential relevance to patentability could be submitted. Do any of the third-party submissions thus filed include information that is not prior art?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_named_one_of_federal#comment-1355577959000
Re: USPTO Named One of Federal Governmentβs Best Places to Work
K. Lee
2012-12-15T08:25:59-05:00
2012-12-15T08:25:59-05:00
WoW, You make it so Wonderful!
I am an Inventor, age 55 & disabled who loves to work in creativity.
Patent Number: D298534. I live near Dallas, Texas where your new
satilite office is or will be located. Thank you in advance for this opportunity to communicate with you directly.
MERRY CHRISTMAS
&
GOD BLESS YOU!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1354205649000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
R W Hughey
2012-11-29T11:14:09-05:00
2012-11-29T11:14:09-05:00
Glad to hear the Superstorm didn't take you out. In my neck of the woods, we were safe but really quite emotionally buffeted by the storm's path. I personally only know a handful of people directly affected by the storm, but the level of effect is staggering. A dear friend's business no longer even stands - I mean that literally: the brick and mortar physical building was washed away to foundation. It's awe-inspiring, and I'm sure more poetic personage will craft better prose about the experience.
I'm rambling. Apologies. Just know that it's wonderful to see Dependability prevails at USPTO.
-Robert Hughey
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1353478352000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
Linda M
2012-11-21T01:12:32-05:00
2012-11-21T01:12:32-05:00
Dear Mr Kappos. Recently you made the statement:
"Our patent system is the envy of the world,"
However, not a single country has implemented US-style software patents, and the many proposals to do so have been met wit significant resistance everywhere.
How do you explain this? The miracle of American exceptionalism? It couldn't possibly be that the US is now a perfect cautionary tale of what not to do?
Sincerely, a software developer who actually innovates.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1353443698000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
Colin Clark
2012-11-20T15:34:58-05:00
2012-11-20T15:34:58-05:00
As a software engineer, I'm watching first hand how software patents are crippling the industry.
The "new review procedure" of the America Invents Act (AIA) is just going to siphon even more money away to lawyers by adding a review step.
I can barely build anything today without infringing on a multitude of patents. If I research beforehand, I get fined 3x for willful infringement. And when I get sued, IP litigation is too expensive to defend against. Only the big players can play.
The current system is COMPLETELY broken.
Thanks.
-Colin Clark
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1352301693000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
Matthew
2012-11-07T10:21:33-05:00
2012-11-07T10:21:33-05:00
It is great to hear the USPTO was able to able to sustain high productivity throughout hurricane Sandy. Undoubtedly due in part to your policies for vast technological improvements to the IT infrastructure. However, I ask you to please institute policy to waive fees for those businesses affected by Hurricane Sandy who were and are unable to be productive from 10/29-11/9. With massive power loss, gasoline shortages, and damage to the NJ/NY metropolitan area, many of us found it difficult to return to a state of normalcy in addition to complying with filing deadlines. Our office in particular just had power restored (which we may be intermittent), and it is the first time some people have had access to heat and electricity in over a week.
Please use your discretion to the extent of USPTO policies to waive fees for those inventors and practitioners adversely affected by Sandy. It would be one less burden for those affected by Sandy so that we can better serve and retain clients while rebuilding our area and homes.
If you are reading this and were adversely affected by Sandy, please also add your written support for temporary relief from fees incurred during the period of disruption.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1352128171000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
Alan Taboada
2012-11-05T10:09:31-05:00
2012-11-05T10:09:31-05:00
I am glad that the USPTO fared well through hurricane Sandy and that the impact was minimized for the organization. However, some of the customers and clients of the USPTO, namely, the inventors and patent practitioners located along the path of Sandy in many cases did not fare so well - some still without electricity (or homes) even now, almost a full week after the storm. Will there be any relief for these practitioners who, without electricity to run their servers and computers or to provide internet connectivity with the USPTO, were unable to meet certain filing deadlines - such as filing continuing patent applications or responses to office actions where the deadline to file fell within this literal blackout period? It would be a shame if patent applications went abandoned or priority claims denied due to the inability to timely file papers during the state of emergency created by this tremendous storm. Thank you for your consideration and understanding of this problem.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1351837120000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
Jon
2012-11-02T02:18:40-04:00
2012-11-02T02:18:40-04:00
I'm impressed.
Good work!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_day_like_any_other#comment-1351801421000
Re: A Day Like Any Other...
Joanna Mendoza
2012-11-01T16:23:41-04:00
2012-11-01T16:23:41-04:00
I think it's safe to say that the many changes and improvements at the USPTO over the last few years reflect great leadership starting at the top and demonstrated at every level from that point "over" ("down" does not seem appropriate) to each and every employee most of us have the pleasure of dealing with on a day-to-day basis. You have built a great team over there, David. I am sure that all of your constituents share the sentiment of wishing everyone on your USPTO team that may be suffering from the events this week the comfort and safety expressed in your message.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/claim_your_exemption#comment-1349890431000
Re: Claim Your Exemption!
Susy Tsang-Foster
2012-10-10T13:33:51-04:00
2012-10-10T13:33:51-04:00
We recommend that you file Form PTO/SB/69 in the U.S. nonprovisional application if you intend to subsequently file in the EPO, even in those instances where you intend to file a PCT. Further questions regarding the EPO’s legal requirements under Rule 141 EPC would be best directed to the EPO.
Susy Tsang-Foster
Legal Advisor
Office of Patent Legal Administration
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/claim_your_exemption#comment-1349286609000
Re: Claim Your Exemption!
Frank H. Foster
2012-10-03T13:50:09-04:00
2012-10-03T13:50:09-04:00
Regarding the Certification and Authorization Form PTO/SB/69, if a U.S. applicant files PCT and at 30 months from the U.S. priority date enters the national phase in the EPO, is there any reason to file the Form PTO/SB/69 before entering the national phase? Technically, a PCT application is "filed" in each country or region on its international filing date (U.S. application still unpublished). But would the EPO care about search results before the national phase is entered at the EPO (most U.S. applications published by then)?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_and_patentability_challenges#comment-1348567963000
Re: PTAB and Patentability Challenges
Thomas J Kowalski
2012-09-25T06:12:43-04:00
2012-09-25T06:12:43-04:00
Dear Director Kappos,
Thank you very much for your Blog, and particularly the your Blog of today on patent challenges under Section 101. I heartily agree with the position stated in the your Blog of today that Section 101 challenges are within the ambit of that which is to be considered by the PTAB in post-grant reviews.
Moreover, I respectfully submit that in ex parte reexamination and inter partes review, the Office is obligated to consider each claim's effective filing date, and in so doing, the Office is obligated to consider whether each claim has support in earlier applications under 35 USC 112, and whether each claim is patent eligible subject matter under Section 101.
For example, if a claim is added on the filing of an RCE (or an old, old Rule File Wrapper Continuation) and that claim is not entitled to support under Section 112 or is not patent eligible subject matter under Section 101, then the claim is only entitled to the date it was filed, not the date of any earlier application in the lineage of the patent being challenged. This is part of what I was raising in my testimony on 6 September 2012.
The, in my view, failure and indeed the outright avoidance, by the Office in reexamination of determining whether such late-added claims have Section 112 and 101 support and eligibility, and hence, in my view, the failure and avoidance of determining each claim's filing date, that I have observed in actual practice, despite the plain language of the Statute, is what I was also, in part, flagging up in my 6 September testimony.
The question of whether a claim has Section 112 and 101 support and eligibility and hence the determination of a each claim's filing date is important in properly examining each claim in ex parte reexamination or inter partes review under Sections 102 and 103 of the Statute because determining each claim's filing date is the first step in determining that which is prior art to each claim.
Accordingly, while I applaud your Blog of today, I welcome working with the Office on the Office actively determining each claim's Section 112 and 101 support and eligibility in earlier applications and hence each claim's effective filing date, in all ex parte reexamination proceedings and all inter partes reviews. In this respect, I will gladly cite at least one recent instance where, in my personal view, the issue was avoided by the Office.
But moreover, thank you and everyone at the USPTO for all the hard work you do in endeavoring to carry out statutory obligations, including the difficult task of implementing the AIA. And thank you for considering my views and having me -- and the public overall -- involved in the process of AIA implementation.
Sincerely, and respectfully submitted,
/Thomas J Kowalski/
Thomas J Kowalski, Reg No 32,147
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing_text2pto_online_filing_of#comment-1348516625000
Re: Announcing Text2PTO: Online Filing of Your Patent Applications as Text Documents
Frank Stromotich
2012-09-24T15:57:05-04:00
2012-09-24T15:57:05-04:00
I have found that a document prepared in WordPerfect X5 converts perfectly everytime to high resolution PDF with Acrobat Pro X and is excellent for viewing at 64x standard page size. Also the file size is only 3.57 KB for a 150 word abstract. Paragraph numbering with 3 leading zeros [0001] and with subparagraphs indented and indentified [0001.01] in relation to paragraph numbers that were changed after initial filing, the applicant/inventor can in his or her mind know exactly how the application is reading while progressing through the USPTO prosecution system. Of course I would be happy to send application in the WordPerfect text as well. If the USPTO decided that they wanted to reformat the application in some way, then I could simply amend my own WordPerfect files so that I convert them into Acrobat X pdf in exactly the way that the USPTO wants to see the application registered for filing, or publication.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_and_patentability_challenges#comment-1348507838000
Re: PTAB and Patentability Challenges
Dennis Crouch
2012-09-24T13:30:38-04:00
2012-09-24T13:30:38-04:00
Director Kappos. We have been discussing this issue in several posts on Patently-O. While I do not agree that the issue is as clear as you suggest here, I do think that you have come to the correct conclusion in the end. I expect that your conclusions will be vindicated by the courts within the next couple of years.
I like this issue because it challenges notions of how patent attorneys think about the law and forces us to really read the statute and identify sources of authority.
Dennis
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/china_s_saic_minister_zhou#comment-1348079547000
Re: Chinaβs SAIC Minister Zhou Visits USPTO
Bruce E.Burdick
2012-09-19T14:32:27-04:00
2012-09-19T14:32:27-04:00
High level communication with Chinese trademark/trade secret administration officials is nice to see. The number of administrative trademark enforcement actions (17,022 on behalf of foreigners) is at once impressive and indicative of the level of rampant trademark piracy in China. We hope this truly is "on behalf of" and not "against." It is to be expected that as Chinese industry matures, Chinese trademarks of importance will be deemed worthy of protection and that will lead to better enforcement of trademarks of foreigners, as well.
It is disappointing to hear an admission by SAIC that is has not had one licensing antitrust case, indicating what we surmise that Chinese industry is allowed to engage in restraint of trade and price fixing and price discrimination that would be illegal in the US. Let's hope for progress there.
It was also disappointing to hear that SAIC admit it does nothing effective against theft of trade secrets. In a closed, government controlled society it is primarily foreign secrets that get disclosed and stolen as there is no incentive to protect them.
It was also disappointing to hear no mention of patents, although it appears that SAIC is not charged with any responsibility in patents, that being handled by a different agency.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/introducing_the_global_dossier_initiative#comment-1347186990000
Re: Introducing the Global Dossier Initiative
Venkata Desai
2012-09-09T06:36:30-04:00
2012-09-09T06:36:30-04:00
It is a fantastic idea, supplementing the PCT that is already in place. Keep up the good work.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/up_and_running_in_detroit#comment-1347138693000
Re: Up and Running in Detroit
Kelm Ricarde
2012-09-08T17:11:33-04:00
2012-09-08T17:11:33-04:00
"examiner doing the interview works from home full time"
Barely a month on the job and already eligible to work from home? Sounds fantastic! Do the examiners at the main (Alexandria) campus get the same perk?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing_text2pto_online_filing_of#comment-1346836466000
Re: Announcing Text2PTO: Online Filing of Your Patent Applications as Text Documents
Dramos Kalapodas
2012-09-05T05:14:26-04:00
2012-09-05T05:14:26-04:00
Text2PTO is one of the best news for filers who struggled in the past with conversions to pdf, compatibility and font embedding issues, file size and margins just to mention a few impediments.
I would go so far to proposing a template with mandatory fillable fields, scientific formula display at no extra cost, with the addition of side notes for suggestion to corrective action.
Great work from PTO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/up_and_running_in_detroit#comment-1346761856000
Re: Up and Running in Detroit
Anup Shah
2012-09-04T08:30:56-04:00
2012-09-04T08:30:56-04:00
Very happy to see an satellite office opening in Detroit. How would one go about viewing open positions at the office and applying for them?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/announcing_text2pto_online_filing_of#comment-1346445960000
Re: Announcing Text2PTO: Online Filing of Your Patent Applications as Text Documents
Ernie Beffel
2012-08-31T16:46:00-04:00
2012-08-31T16:46:00-04:00
This is a great initiative.
Please consider accepting paired submissions. Invite folks to submit a PDF generated directly from a Word document, without scanning, along with their Word document.
We have all had parts of a Word document change or move around as the Word document goes from one system to another, even within the same office. It is scary to not know exactly how a document will appear within the PTO's system, even if this fear is well-founded.
It would be attractive to give PTO a PDF produced from a Word document, as an immutable record of what we submitted, along with giving you the Word document. We would get certainty of appearance, because PDF documents print with the same appearance across printers and OS platforms, and you would get import ready text for your production systems. We would be happy to certify that the Word document submitted is the document from which the PDF file was generated.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/up_and_running_in_detroit#comment-1346102301000
Re: Up and Running in Detroit
Thomas D Franklin
2012-08-27T17:18:21-04:00
2012-08-27T17:18:21-04:00
Having conducted that first interview in Detroit, I can further report that it went off without a hitch. The upgraded video equipment works well and the staff in Detroit is a joy to work with. An allowance before the the first office action and just 6 months after filing was nice also.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/got_an_idea_as_big#comment-1345740735000
Re: Got an Idea as Big as Texas?
Lawrence Averick
2012-08-23T12:52:15-04:00
2012-08-23T12:52:15-04:00
Would it be possible to request from the applicant an element numbe,r Bill of Materials (BOM) so that the elements can be easily referenced?
Since, the PTO no longer has a drafting department, it is up to the examiner to check the drawings. The BOM would allow both the applicant and the examiner to better understand the application.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/introducing_the_global_dossier_initiative#comment-1345036906000
Re: Introducing the Global Dossier Initiative
Frank Stromotich
2012-08-15T09:21:46-04:00
2012-08-15T09:21:46-04:00
The Global Dossier initiative would be substantial advanced by imposition of mandatory paragraph numbering for all new application filings.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_kids_are_okay#comment-1344878756000
Re: The Kids Are Okay
Jon
2012-08-13T13:25:56-04:00
2012-08-13T13:25:56-04:00
This example highlights the importance of teaching prior art searches and basic seminars on patents. A search on thermochromic barcodes will show several parties, including the University of Rhode Island, have won similar awards for this barcode solution. A quick search of the USPTO patents would also reveal the solution is patented.
Innovation can't be taught in the vacuum of academia's tendency to ignore prior art. For the students, understanding the basic steps in preparing a patent will lead them to true innovation and avoid the disappointment of putting off prior art searches.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/introducing_the_global_dossier_initiative#comment-1343993383000
Re: Introducing the Global Dossier Initiative
William N Hulsey III
2012-08-03T07:29:43-04:00
2012-08-03T07:29:43-04:00
I think it is an outstanding idea.
Congratulations on this and many of the innovative initiatives underway at the USPTO.
All the best,
Bill Hulsey
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_kids_are_okay#comment-1343668422000
Re: The Kids Are Okay
Remi
2012-07-30T13:13:42-04:00
2012-07-30T13:13:42-04:00
Wow, great ideas!
Exactly how old are these kids?
-Remi
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/some_thoughts_on_patentability#comment-1343573588000
Re: Some Thoughts on Patentability
Robert Harrison
2012-07-29T10:53:08-04:00
2012-07-29T10:53:08-04:00
Director Kappos makes a very sensible point which presumably emanates from his time as a patent practitioner. The 101 test is clearly important - but once a patent draftsman (and, dare I say, the patent examiner?) concentrates on the bare essentials of patent law - novelty, non-obviousness and enablement - then many of the issues surrounding 101 become either irrelevant or much clearer. The EPO have put is clearly - what is the contribution of the invention to the technical art. One can only determine this contribution if a search has been first carried out and an understanding of the invention's position with respect to prior art obtained. It is then much easier to determine whether the contribution to the art fulfills the statutory requirements under 101.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/some_thoughts_on_patentability#comment-1343452724000
Re: Some Thoughts on Patentability
Thanh Loan
2012-07-28T01:18:44-04:00
2012-07-28T01:18:44-04:00
Based on my experience, I appreciate the wisdom of the court’s discussion relating to resolving disputed claims by focusing initially on patentability requirements of § 102, 103, and 112, rather than § 101. I have found that when claims are refined to distinguish over the prior art, recite definite boundaries, and be fully enabled based on a complete written description, they do not usually encounter issues of eligibility based on reciting mere abstract ideas or broad fundamental concepts. Put another way, every business looks for opportunities to sequence workflow so that the first issues addressed are the ones that can simplify or completely resolve other issues. This is good basic management for businesses, and for patent offices.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_official_honored_for_public#comment-1337544808000
Re: USPTO Official Honored for Public Service
Annette M. Thompson
2012-05-20T16:13:28-04:00
2012-05-20T16:13:28-04:00
Kudos and congrats! Indeed, Danette deserves all our admiration and thanks for providing the leadership that makes teleworking on such a massive scale possible and productive for the USPTO. I first became acquainted with Ms. Campbell in Spring 2011 as a regular member of the Examining Corps. There are likely many positive accolades that could be expressed about this uniquely dynamic and visionary individual. But, succinctly stated, Danette is Excellence in Action with a purposeful passion that trail-blazed a path that has forever altered the way in which this Agency efficiently and effectively processes the by-products of American innovation. Although unlikely to seek such accolades, Under Secretary Kappos’ declaration of Ms. Campbell being “one of our stars” is indubitably well-deserved.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_co_sponsors_ip_small#comment-1337266018000
Re: USPTO Co-Sponsors IP Small Claims Roundtable
Ann Chaitovitz
2012-05-17T10:46:58-04:00
2012-05-17T10:46:58-04:00
I want to thank everyone for their comments. We are trying to increase access to IP justice for small inventors and creators. As such, we are examining ways we might develop small claims proceedings in both the copyright and patent areas. Preliminarily, we are looking at evidence and comments to determine which stakeholders need this type of proceeding, what type of claims should and shouldn’t be addressed, and who this type of proceeding may harm, so we can develop the proper parameters. Then, there are many complicating factors in developing the proceedings – does it satisfy the Constitutional limitations, does it require legislative changes, would it require additional governmental resources, and will it impact the development of federal case law. Developing a small claims system will not be an easy task, but one we believe is important and worthwhile. The GWU Law School event was very productive. It was recorded and will be posted on GW’s site soon. I will let you know when it is up, so you can access it if you wish.
@Joanna, we are considering this type of proposal, and similar proposals. If you want to take a look at some of the specific proposals that have been suggested in the copyright area, I refer you to the comments filed on this issue at the Copyright Office, http://www.copyright.gov/docs/smallclaims/comments/
@Stan, That was one of the issues that were discussed at the event (you can watch when the link is up), and we are continuing the discussion. Stay tuned.
@Chris, There were no power points or materials, just two presentations and then roundtable discussions. It was an invitational gathering put on by GWU Law School, co-sponsored by the USPTO, of 50 IP experts who have been active in the area of small claims for IP. For future information, I suggest you this blog and also the small claims page at the Copyright Office, http://www.copyright.gov/docs/smallclaims/ You will also want to watch the event when the link is posted.
@Sanjeev, Thanks. We are examining this idea to ensure that independent inventors like you will have accessible and affordable recourse when your IP rights are infringed.
Ann Chaitovitz
Attorney-Advisor
USPTO, Office of Administrator for Policy and External Affairs
U.S. Deparment of Commerce
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_co_sponsors_ip_small#comment-1337252293000
Re: USPTO Co-Sponsors IP Small Claims Roundtable
Sanjeev K. Singh
2012-05-17T06:58:13-04:00
2012-05-17T06:58:13-04:00
Dear David,
First of all, thank you spearheading all the reforms at the PTO with the help from the Congress and people sharing their ideas and willing to change the status quo.
As to the Small Claims system introduction in US, I really like this idea given the financial cost of the alternate, i.e., litigation. I say this being an independent inventor and one who works in the patent field. Since I am not aware of such a system perhaps we can look at UK's system or if someone else has designed one to see what works and what not. I wish I could offer some more insight but one thing that would help is that the new system has to be easily accessible and affordable to inventors. Although I can see the challenges of designing one which could provide a nice solution to IP right holders like me.
Thanks again for all your good work and all the best for the future improvements.
Best regards,
--Sanjeev
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_co_sponsors_ip_small#comment-1337185427000
Re: USPTO Co-Sponsors IP Small Claims Roundtable
Chris Tanner
2012-05-16T12:23:47-04:00
2012-05-16T12:23:47-04:00
Hello. I am very interested in the idea of small claims proceedings for patent and/or copyright claims. I did not know of this event or I would have attended.
Were there any PowerPoints, books, CDs, or other presentation materials that I can purchase? Also, is there a website or a Facebook page?
I am glad such a thing exists, I wish I could find out when the next event might be. Chris Tanner, Esq.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_co_sponsors_ip_small#comment-1337181740000
Re: USPTO Co-Sponsors IP Small Claims Roundtable
Stan E. Delo
2012-05-16T11:22:20-04:00
2012-05-16T11:22:20-04:00
David-
This possible program sounds like an excellent idea to me, and I certainly hope you and your team will be able to implement such a program in the near future. As an independent with small financial resources, nearly any type of litigation is practically out of my reach, short of finding contingency representation. Do you have any idea yet of what would constitute a small claim?
Thanks for all of your hard work.
Sincerely yours,
Stan E. Delo
Port Townsend, WA
stand@olypen.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_co_sponsors_ip_small#comment-1337175553000
Re: USPTO Co-Sponsors IP Small Claims Roundtable
Joanna Mendoza
2012-05-16T09:39:13-04:00
2012-05-16T09:39:13-04:00
Perhaps one way to resolve small claims disputes is to submit them in writing to volunteer attorneys who the parties stipulate to allow to hear the matters -- much like we do for attorney fee disputes that are handled via arbitrations with volunteer attorney arbitrators in California. The rules used for that could easily be adapted for this type of thing, including the appeal process that could allow parties 30 days to appeal to the TTAB/ PTAB/Copyright Office if they choose non-binding small claims arbitration. There should be some built-in advantage for having it binding, however. Attorneys throughout the country could sign up to be volunteer arbitrators, and the PTO and Copyright Office could appoint the neutral for each case. With the rules already in place and working for the fee arbitration process, most of the work in that respect is already done for you. The real work will be deciding who at each agency will be responsible for the program and then getting attorneys to volunteer for the program.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/gao_a_helpful_partner_on#comment-1336707973000
Re: GAO a Helpful Partner on AIA Implementation
Stan E. Delo
2012-05-10T23:46:13-04:00
2012-05-10T23:46:13-04:00
This sounds like really good news to me. The GAO has been around for a very long time, so getting an endorsement from them like this speaks volumes about how much homework has been done. I bet David did about half of his part in Bunny Slippers during his spare weekends!
Best regards and thanks David~
Stan~
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/bpai_reducing_the_backlog#comment-1336664161000
Re: BPAI: Reducing the Backlog
Les
2012-05-10T11:36:01-04:00
2012-05-10T11:36:01-04:00
The following quoted portion of the post seems to confuse different issues. We submit that the public perception that appeals are not necessary is because the public perceives that the applications should have been allowed and that it is just error at the TC and the rush to finality that is forcing the appeal.
It is pointless then to measure whether an application is "ripe for appeal", meaning measuring whether or not that the Office has issued a document called a second or Final Office Action and whether or not the claims of the application are in a proper format.
The issue is the quality and appropriateness of the rejections in the document. Not that the public feels appeals are being filed after only first office actions or while applications "include deficiencies" that could be addressed by amendment or otherwise.
"This is just one avenue which we are pursuing as we are continually looking for ways to improve the patents appeals process. In fact, public perception has suggested a high number of pending applications were sent to the BPAI from the Patent Technology Centers (TCs) unnecessarily. In response to this perception and because of our desire to decrease the backlog of ex parte cases, the Patent TC Directors working on a BPAI task force enlisted the help of the Office of Patent Quality Assurance (OPQA). OPQA reviewed a sample of 1,300 pending applications at the BPAI. This review was intended to determine if some of the cases most recently sent to the BPAI from the patent corps were truly ripe for appeal."
Results of this review found a low number of reviewed applications containing deficiencies that would result in them not being ready for review by the BPAI.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_official_honored_for_public#comment-1336580809000
Re: USPTO Official Honored for Public Service
Esmonde Holowaty
2012-05-09T12:26:49-04:00
2012-05-09T12:26:49-04:00
Congratulations, Danette.
Esmonde Holowaty (Inventor)
www.ehinvent.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_official_honored_for_public#comment-1336571427000
Re: USPTO Official Honored for Public Service
Lara Shane
2012-05-09T09:50:27-04:00
2012-05-09T09:50:27-04:00
Congratulations, Danette!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/bpai_reducing_the_backlog#comment-1336148394000
Re: BPAI: Reducing the Backlog
Anonymous
2012-05-04T12:19:54-04:00
2012-05-04T12:19:54-04:00
The blog states: "Examiners recently completed mandatory training on the above new rules for the BPAI, but there is more opportunity for improvement." Are a copy of these training materials available to the public? Where can they be obtained?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/bpai_reducing_the_backlog#comment-1336135869000
Re: BPAI: Reducing the Backlog
Darin Gibby
2012-05-04T08:51:09-04:00
2012-05-04T08:51:09-04:00
One thing that would be helpful is fixing the pre-appeal conference procedure. Right now, nearly all cases I send to pre-appeal conferences end up being rubber stamped. When I file a full blown appeal brief for those same cases, a good number of them get kicked back and I get a new office action. Why can't the examiner's supervisor figure this out before I spend the time and money on the appeal brief?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_role_of_submission_limits#comment-1335665962000
Re: The Role of Submission Limits in Timely Completion of Supplemental Examination
Bruce Burdick, Registered Patent Attorney 27,422
2012-04-28T22:19:22-04:00
2012-04-28T22:19:22-04:00
An outspoken advocate for independent inventors, I support this limit. Ind. inventors want efficient prosecution. Please consider a per item fee and plus a lower basic fee to get to the same revenue to encourage fewer items and even greater speed and efficiency. I suggest you stepwise reduce the decisional time limit for less than 5 items submitted. For example to 10 weeks for 4 items, 8 for 3, 6 for 2, and 4 for 1 to the pressure on staff to be efficient. If 3 months (13 weeks) is sufficient for 10 items (i.e. 1.3 weeks/item) then 10,8,6,4 respectively for 4,3,2,1 items is quite fair, as computerization speeds the clerical work for all involved. 13 weeks for decision on 1 item of information is not good efficiency.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/record_results_for_trademark_pendency#comment-1335542955000
Re: Record Results for Trademark Pendency
Rachel Greenberg Matz
2012-04-27T12:09:15-04:00
2012-04-27T12:09:15-04:00
I recently heard Mr. Kappos' announcement regarding the launch of the Colorado Pro Bono Patent (ProBoPat) Initiative. I am a working, single mom with 2 young kids, and live in the Denver metro area. I have been trying to obtain a Provisional Patent for a technological innovation for mobile devices, but continue to be hindered in the process by mounting costs.
How can I enroll or apply for the Colorado Pro Bono Patent Initiative?
Any insight or guidance is greatly appreciated.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_efficient_ip_system_that#comment-1335008948000
Re: Increased Fees v. Operational Efficiencies
Valentin Uncheselu
2012-04-21T07:49:08-04:00
2012-04-21T07:49:08-04:00
James, you made an interesting point – that a backlog gives you the chance to (better) qualify your idea (if you haven’t done so). Sure, not everyone needs accelerated examination. But you should still qualify your idea first. Then Patent and Monetize.
Patents 911
Inventions through a Business Lens
http://patents911.blogspot.com/
https://twitter.com/#!/Patents911
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/recruiting_for_innovation#comment-1333913856000
Re: Recruiting for Innovation
Bill S.
2012-04-08T15:37:36-04:00
2012-04-08T15:37:36-04:00
Unwillingness to relocate is a strong indicator that a prospective employee will not be dedicated to his or her job. Next we'll have people commenting that they wanted to become park rangers but the NPS is unfair because it won't agree to move a national park to the other side of the country so they can have a shorter commute.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/realignment_in_the_office_of#comment-1332935388000
Re: Realignment in the Office of the Commissioner for Patents Helps to Improve Efficiency
Frank Stromotich
2012-03-28T07:49:48-04:00
2012-03-28T07:49:48-04:00
The USPTO has entered into PPH agreements with Germany and Austria which unfortunately operate to the disadvantage of those who file in English. Both Germany and Austria require that all those who enter the national phase in their countries must communicate with them entirely in German (HO of DPMA in Munich). Those who enter the national phase in the EPO (HO also in Munich) and include Germany as a designated country will probably have no problem because the EPO deals entirely in English.
Furthermore, the German patent office DPMA has only about eight hundred patent examiners according to their 2010 annual report. That suggests that pendency in Germany DPMA on filing direct to their national office, DPMA, will be very long relative to the USPTO.
Furthermore, the DPMAdirect is just getting going and is offering their first training program for people in the use of their German only website --- set for April and May in Munich.
I would suggest that the USPTO issue an advisory on the PPH to Germany, that those who wish their applications to be prosecuted in English file with the EPO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/recruiting_for_innovation#comment-1332604188000
Re: Recruiting for Innovation
James
2012-03-24T11:49:48-04:00
2012-03-24T11:49:48-04:00
I agree with Mr. Gray. Although the USPTO's telework initiative is already the best in the federal government, the Office should expand the initiative to make it available immediately upon hiring for the majority of this country that is unable to move to the D.C. area, allowing the Office to obtain and retain qualified candidates.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_efficient_ip_system_that#comment-1332464141000
Re: Increased Fees v. Operational Efficiencies
james
2012-03-22T20:55:41-04:00
2012-03-22T20:55:41-04:00
Dear Mr. Kappos, I'd like to ask that you take a step back and see whether the goals of reducing backlog is worth the increased cost that the Patent Office is proposing or forcing on the user community. When an application is filed, currently there is a 2 or 3 year delay to the first office action. When the inventor receives the office action, the inventor needs to spend more money on a patent attorney to properly respond to the office action. It is during this 2 to 3 year period of time that the patentee needs to spend time to seek investors and licensee and test the market to determine how vigorously one should argue with the Patent Office to get the patent.
If the patent office were to render an office action the day after a patent application is filed, then the inventor must spend more money on the patent process without this market insight. This is money that the inventor could have spent determining market receptance, investor and licensee interest.
Lets take a look at accelerated examination. Everyone said that they were losing money because of the long delay in getting a patent. Is that true? We have data from the accelerated program now. If you pay $4800, then your application is pushed to the front of the line. Well only 1.3% of all patent applications chose to push their application to the front of the line. These 1.3% believed that the benefit of early examination would be worth equal to or more than the pay to play fee.
Mr. Kappos. I ask that you look after the interest of the other 98.7% . It seems that everyone is so focused on reducing patent pendency that they forgot how the patent system worked.
If you reduced patent pendency to zero, then you would benefit only 1.3% but hurt the other 98.7%.
I think that reducing patent pendency is a good goal but I'm just asking you to find the right balance for the entire patent user community and not just the 1.3%. Thank you for your consideration.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/recruiting_for_innovation#comment-1332440547000
Re: Recruiting for Innovation
Andrew Gray
2012-03-22T14:22:27-04:00
2012-03-22T14:22:27-04:00
I was offered a position at the USPTO but I could not accept the position since they could not "guarantee" me tele-work. I think you would get more high quality candidates if you could offer the guarantee of tele-work instead of a policy of "we'll talk about it once you start work." Re-location was not an option for me (except for the required training and short term assignments), though I was a very well qualified candidate. I realize you may have your reasons for this policy but you might want to re-consider your policy if you want to catch a wider net of qualified candidates.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_efficient_ip_system_that#comment-1332420858000
Re: Increased Fees v. Operational Efficiencies
Kim Rubin
2012-03-22T08:54:18-04:00
2012-03-22T08:54:18-04:00
Have you tried? What about advanced software that dramatically improves search, available to the public, too? What about advanced tools that use the existing classification system, include both prior art and future citations to assist? What about a new requirement that all technical keywords, terminology and product names known to the inventor must be disclosed, in a new keyword abstract?" How about a completely new taxonomy that reflects today's economy? Don't claim improved efficiency is impossible until you try. Your budget is $2.8 billion and you have a few hundred million dollars in profit sitting around. You should offer a $250,000 reward to anyone who comes up with any scheme to improve efficiency, with public review (and voting) of ideas, with runner up prizes. Perhaps the winner wins a full development contract from the USPTO. Or are you going the way of the post office and staying with 19th century methods and technology?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_efficient_ip_system_that#comment-1332336727000
Re: Increased Fees v. Operational Efficiencies
Dave Morrison, Salt Lake City PTRC, Salt Lake City, UT
2012-03-21T09:32:07-04:00
2012-03-21T09:32:07-04:00
Dear Director Kappos,
One of the great needs identified by twenty-five years worth of librarians in the PTRC (formerly PTDL) Program is to capture the data for all U.S. patents prior to 1976 in electronic, fielded format. The creation of such a searchable database will increase the effectiveness of searching US patents online; preserve the integrity of this unique record of American invention at a time when the paper indexes are rapidly disappearing from repository shelves; and facilitate further study of how, in Lincoln's words, "The patent system added the fuel of interest to the fire of genius."
Thank you for considering such an idea.
Dave Morrison
Marriott Library
University of Utah
Salt Lake City, UT
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_efficient_ip_system_that#comment-1332327420000
Re: Increased Fees v. Operational Efficiencies
Richard Beem
2012-03-21T06:57:00-04:00
2012-03-21T06:57:00-04:00
Director Kappos: Thanks to you and your colleagues at the USPTO for your improved efficiency, communications and transparency. You have made great progress in reducing the backlog by 100,000 or so applications in a year. Keep it up. Of course it is a benefit to inventors and the public to continue reducing the backlog and to issue meritorious patents promptly. In 1849, Abraham Lincoln's patent 6,469 issued two months after his application was filed, and now your fastest examinations are once again approaching that speed. That said, when you set fees, please try to make patent filings, prosecution and post-grant as affordable you can for inventors. The proposed post-grant fees are pretty steep. Thanks again to you and your colleagues for all you do.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/in_celebration_of_women_entrepreneurs#comment-1332290885000
Re: In Celebration of Women Entrepreneurs
Testament and Will
2012-03-20T20:48:05-04:00
2012-03-20T20:48:05-04:00
I Think every one should have to join to you for celebrating women.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patents_for_humanity#comment-1330663632000
Re: Patents for Humanity
Aravin
2012-03-01T23:47:12-05:00
2012-03-01T23:47:12-05:00
Nice initiation, hope all countries will fallow it for rapid betterment of the community in which we are living
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/supporting_ip_a_global_challenge#comment-1330458470000
Re: Supporting IP: A Global Challenge and Responsibility
Iris Zhao, MD
2012-02-28T14:47:50-05:00
2012-02-28T14:47:50-05:00
We support
1. global collaboration about global fair competition through patented new discovery and new health profession/service/product made thereof.
2. age based acceleration,
3. PCT based acceleration,
Multiphase Health/Medicine
Pasadena Health Technology
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/in_celebration_of_black_history#comment-1329818822000
Re: In Celebration of Black History
Daima Phipps
2012-02-21T05:07:02-05:00
2012-02-21T05:07:02-05:00
Thank you Director Kappos for such a thoughtful and inspiring message in memory of great black americans who have contributed to our country's innovation.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patents_for_humanity#comment-1328961294000
Re: Patents for Humanity
Shannon Johansen
2012-02-11T06:54:54-05:00
2012-02-11T06:54:54-05:00
The Patents for Humanity Pilot Program is a GREAT idea. Team MagnoWind/ inventor B.Johansen would like to apply for it. Yes, the speediness could help solutions to Humanitarian problems get where it is needed faster, i.e. energy, water, food production in off-grid areas. Necessity IS the mother of invention, our necessity was lack of a source of energy.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/investing_in_our_newest_employees#comment-1328531182000
Re: Investing in our Newest Employees Pays Dividends
David L Suazo
2012-02-06T07:26:22-05:00
2012-02-06T07:26:22-05:00
This is a great idea long overdue. I am glad it is being implemented and am confident it will increase the retention rate for new examiners. An experienced mentor can greatly help a new examiner to avoid common pitfalls and even give sound advise when there are issues concerning SPE's they otherwise wouldn't know how to deal with.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/no_time_for_gridlock_at#comment-1328438234000
Re: No Time for Gridlock at USPTO
Logan Yu
2012-02-05T05:37:14-05:00
2012-02-05T05:37:14-05:00
This is very inspiring. I am in the process of applying to be a patent examiner and look forward to being a part of the PTO team as it faces these challenges.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/no_time_for_gridlock_at#comment-1327920386000
Re: No Time for Gridlock at USPTO
John Crane
2012-01-30T05:46:26-05:00
2012-01-30T05:46:26-05:00
Dave
I agree with your comments. Over the years the PTO has struggled to perform its Constitutionally based objective. It is nice to see things moving in the right direction under your guidance and to see the Congress pass legislation that makes sense in this age of true international competition.
John Crane
Your former associate at WAPO
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_patent_prosecution_highway_scaling#comment-1326989127000
Re: The Patent Prosecution HighwayβScaling a Sensible Approach to Worksharing
Michael Neas, Office of PCT Legal Administration, USPTO
2012-01-19T11:05:27-05:00
2012-01-19T11:05:27-05:00
PPH 2.0 documents have not yet been posted on the USPTO Web site. We are working hard to make that information available and anticipate posting a notice soon. We appreciate your patience.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_patent_prosecution_highway_scaling#comment-1326880301000
Re: The Patent Prosecution HighwayβScaling a Sensible Approach to Worksharing
Oswaldo del Castillo Mujica
2012-01-18T04:51:41-05:00
2012-01-18T04:51:41-05:00
First and foremost congrats on a continued effort to improve the image -and work- delivered by the hundreds of contributors in that organization. Allow me to also send a big thumbs up to the 'presence' of Steve Jobs in it which underlines the need for all of us inventors and would be trademark creators to push our creativety and follow his footsteps. Well done and good continuance!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_patent_prosecution_highway_scaling#comment-1326715291000
Re: The Patent Prosecution HighwayβScaling a Sensible Approach to Worksharing
NL
2012-01-16T07:01:31-05:00
2012-01-16T07:01:31-05:00
Hello,
I just checked the PPH page and couldn't find any information re. PPH 2.0. Has the information already been posted somewhere or is it going to be updated in the future?
Thank you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_patent_prosecution_highway_scaling#comment-1326537737000
Re: The Patent Prosecution HighwayβScaling a Sensible Approach to Worksharing
patient appointment scheduling
2012-01-14T05:42:17-05:00
2012-01-14T05:42:17-05:00
Users of PPH benefit by fast portfolio-building but also by enjoying the collective savings of millions of dollars in the process. From a recent study by our user community demonstrated that prosecution costs can be realized through PPH, depending on the complexity of the invention. For international filers of all sizes, that level of savings adds up quickly. And even while the PPH has grown tremendously in usage, we’ve continued the mission, working with our partner offices which now total 21 to further improve the program
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/simplifying_the_ex_parte_appeals#comment-1326121844000
Re: Simplifying the Ex Parte Appeals Process and Reducing the Burden on Appellants and Examiners
James Donald Smith
2012-01-09T10:10:44-05:00
2012-01-09T10:10:44-05:00
Professor Crouch,
Thank you for participating in what we want to be an open dialog between the Board and its stakeholders regarding the backlog issue. The Board is currently in the process of hiring more Administrative Patent Judges to work on reducing the backlog. Also, we also are focusing efforts on drafting decisions that are more concise and efficient, while striving to maintain the high level of quality appropriately expected from the Board. We are exploring other ways of addressing the backlog. To that end, we have established an email address to which our stakeholders may submit suggestions for our consideration: BPAI_Backlog_Reduction@uspto.gov. Lastly, let me assure you that, with the provision of sufficient resources, the Board can and will handle the new processes coming to us due to the passage of the America Invents Act, while concurrently devoting time and talent to the task of addressing the backlog of ex parte appeals cases.
James Donald Smith
Chief Administrative Patent Judge
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_farewell_message#comment-1324926843000
Re: A Farewell Message
Meg Boulware
2011-12-26T14:14:03-05:00
2011-12-26T14:14:03-05:00
Best wishes on the next stage of your career. It was a pleasure working with you. Meg Boulware
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_farewell_message#comment-1324344565000
Re: A Farewell Message
Eb Bright
2011-12-19T20:29:25-05:00
2011-12-19T20:29:25-05:00
Bob,
Thank you for your tremendous service.
Best wishes to you,
Eb
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/investing_in_our_newest_employees#comment-1324060283000
Re: Investing in our Newest Employees Pays Dividends
Bob Havlin
2011-12-16T13:31:23-05:00
2011-12-16T13:31:23-05:00
While I am sure the mentor program was helpful, statistically, the numbers do not really support that conclusion:
2/50 = 4% (95%CI = 2% - 12%);
7/83 = 8.4% (95%CI = 4% - 16%)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/simplifying_the_ex_parte_appeals#comment-1323103300000
Re: Simplifying the Ex Parte Appeals Process and Reducing the Burden on Appellants and Examiners
Dennis Crouch
2011-12-05T11:41:40-05:00
2011-12-05T11:41:40-05:00
Chief Judge Smith. Thank you for this post and for working so hard to improve the efficacy of the appeal process. These rules are fine as far as they go and will hopefully be somewhat helpful. However, there is a big 25,000 pound elephant in the room.
The Board has a growing 25,000+ backlog of cases pending appeals. What specifically is being done to address the enormous backlog?
Thanks!
Dennis Crouch
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/aiding_our_future_ip_practitioners#comment-1322095031000
Re: Aiding our Future IP Practitioners
Bruce Burick
2011-11-23T19:37:11-05:00
2011-11-23T19:37:11-05:00
Twenty-nine applications is a start. That is a negligible number unless groups of law students work on each one of those 29 cases. Surely that is what occurs. A useful format might be to have each student in a class draft their own version of the app and responses and have the examiner grade them.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/quality_continues_to_rise#comment-1320339475000
Re: Quality Continues to Rise
Lawrence S. Cohen
2011-11-03T12:57:55-04:00
2011-11-03T12:57:55-04:00
I don't want to be too fussy, but the terminology used in PAIR could be improved. I suggest it all be reviewed. For example, responses to office actions are entitled "amendment". But not all responses are amendments and even if there are amendments, there are also arguements to traverse rejections. Could we change the reference to "response" instead of "amendment".
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/quality_continues_to_rise#comment-1320130832000
Re: Quality Continues to Rise
Irwin Weisel
2011-11-01T03:00:32-04:00
2011-11-01T03:00:32-04:00
Inventions can have a multi degree of design concepts, which makes it very difficult on which design concept to file for patent. Without knowing existing patents that R being filed because of the cost burden in patent searches and without knowing if you have done a 2 year 100% complete patent search before you were to file for a patent. Merit patent designs can have amendments, revisions, flaws and could even go through cost burden during a process-of–elimination science to adapt to a variety of methodologies to the point that the patent invention might go through a completely new redesign process. How can a 1 person compete Example; large companies that patent everything whereas cannot patent every design concept? Since 1982 like a grandfather pioneer I have researched a material with a variety of applications which now even have a few spinoff high potential designs whereas intellectual properties have always been compromised with no recovery is not fair
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/august_patents_dashboard_overview#comment-1319178942000
Re: August Patents Dashboard Overview
James Cochran
2011-10-21T02:35:42-04:00
2011-10-21T02:35:42-04:00
Kudos to the USPTO for providing this tremendous amount of information to the public -- and without FOIA requests! Your efforts at government transparency deserve much applause and support.
As for visualizing the data, here are my requests / suggestions: 1. Please have the vertical scales of all the graphs start at the origin (when you abbreviate the scales, it exaggerates the actual trends) and 2. for all the graphs including the pop-ups, I suggest you put the months of the year along the X-axis, even if it makes for a window that has to be scrolled horizontally.
Keep up the good work, especially as demonstrated by what you have achieved with the Clearing the Oldest Patent Applications effort. Better keep hiring more examiners!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/quality_continues_to_rise#comment-1318616461000
Re: Quality Continues to Rise
Lawrence S. Cohen
2011-10-14T14:21:01-04:00
2011-10-14T14:21:01-04:00
I appreciate that procedures are put in place based on some level of logical consideration. But one of them, I propose be changed. Submissions are given a preliminary review prior to being entered. One type of error causes the submission to be not filed, that is, a typographical error of the claim status. A claim might say “previously submitted” when in fact it has been amended and should say “currently amended”. I think this is rather common because we do amendments from the prior version of the claims, and missing the status isn't rare. Refusing entry for that reason is, I suggest a real waste of time and effort. In fact there are many errors that an examiner treats when she responds to a response. This should be in that category. It allows the examiner to consider the response and react to it, including pointing out the apparent error or inconsistency (it could be that amendment was not intended) all in one step. This would move things along more efficiently.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/august_patents_dashboard_overview#comment-1317219809000
Re: August Patents Dashboard Overview
Bruce Burdick
2011-09-28T10:23:29-04:00
2011-09-28T10:23:29-04:00
Two suggestions for the patent dashboard:
1. a prior month needle (e.g. a yellow set point needle) on the speedometers as a baseline to instantly show whether speed is up or down, and
2. reverse the numbers on those speedometers that currently indicate slowness (e.g. pendency, backlog & actions per disposal) so that movement to the right (clockwise) indicates faster/better as on a real dashboard rather than slower/poorer as they do now.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/re_inventing_the_us_patent#comment-1316699530000
Re: Re-Inventing the US Patent System
Nickolaus E. Leggett
2011-09-22T09:52:10-04:00
2011-09-22T09:52:10-04:00
We need to make sure that the Post Grant Review (PGR) process is not used as a means to force legitimate new claims or entire patents into the public domain. The USPTO has the authority to closely monitor the PGR activity and report this information to the public. I am proposing that the USPTO establish a public data base that reports the results of all the PGR cases. This data base should include the names and corporate affiliations of the parties involved, references to the patents involved, and online links to any written judgments of the administrative patent judges.
This public data base of PGR activity would allow members of the public, such as me, to determine the identity of the corporations challenging newly issued patents and to determine if any “patent busting” strategies are being employed. This open-government approach would help to deter any misuse of the PGR system.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/re_inventing_the_us_patent#comment-1316422690000
Re: Re-Inventing the US Patent System
Matt
2011-09-19T04:58:10-04:00
2011-09-19T04:58:10-04:00
I submit that another outstanding and growing issue left unresolved in patenting is the inception of patent trolling. Shell corporations buy out weak, vague software patents that should never have been granted and enforce them on everyone from the makers of Angry Birds to a small startup that uses the internet. Literally, these patents are often as simple as describing a database. The expense of litigation is so great that victims are left to pay licensing fees, ranging from the 10's of thousands to millions, to these companies who's only goal is to make money off these patents. Something needs to be done to address this concern, be it a clear statement on the validity of these software and business methods patents, or additional legislation to inhibit patent trolling while still preserving legitimate patent protection means.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/re_inventing_the_us_patent#comment-1316217325000
Re: Re-Inventing the US Patent System
Richard Beem
2011-09-16T19:55:25-04:00
2011-09-16T19:55:25-04:00
Bravo, Mr.Kappos, for your support for the AIA and for modernizing the PTO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rural_america_wellspring_of_innovation#comment-1315564341000
Re: Rural America: Wellspring of Innovation
Geographer
2011-09-09T06:32:21-04:00
2011-09-09T06:32:21-04:00
Blaine, Minnesota, is hardly rural. It is essentially a suburb of Minneapolis.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rural_america_wellspring_of_innovation#comment-1315069283000
Re: Rural America: Wellspring of Innovation
terrell beatty
2011-09-03T13:01:23-04:00
2011-09-03T13:01:23-04:00
How or where do I start with patenting an idea. Thanks
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rural_america_wellspring_of_innovation#comment-1314100430000
Re: Rural America: Wellspring of Innovation
Aaron Passman
2011-08-23T07:53:50-04:00
2011-08-23T07:53:50-04:00
I suggest and encourage that, "Empire Of the Air" by Tom Lewis be read, to get a take on the history of and people behind Radio and Television.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patents_ombudsman_pilot_program_to#comment-1312649760000
Re: Patents Ombudsman Pilot Program to Go Permanent
Bruce Burdick
2011-08-06T12:56:00-04:00
2011-08-06T12:56:00-04:00
This is an excellent resource which should help both the Office and applicants (especially pro se) and attorneys in unfamiliar or infrequently used procedures, provided the timeliness continues. The key to usefulness is the timeliness, as these questions will frequently arise under the pressure of a deadline and providing the answer via the ombudsman response may save PTO time in handling an improper filing which is avoided by timely explanation or guidance by the Ombudsman. I would suggest notice of this resource be provided in all Office Actions for the next year so that those who do not follow this blog are made aware of the availability of this resource.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/first_office_action_backlog_dips#comment-1310533444000
Re: First Office Action Backlog Dips Below 700,000
ipInsiders.com
2011-07-13T01:04:04-04:00
2011-07-13T01:04:04-04:00
Great news! What are your plans to break the 600,000 mark?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/report_from_the_ip5_meeting#comment-1309860957000
Re: Report From the IP5 Meeting in Tokyo
JB
2011-07-05T06:15:57-04:00
2011-07-05T06:15:57-04:00
Your summary states the IP5 account for "almost 80% of all patent applications filed worldwide" while the fiveipoffices.org website (on the "about us" page) states the IP5 Offices account for 90% of all patent applications filed worldwide and for 93% of all work carried out under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)." Why the discrepancy?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview_program_continues_to_find#comment-1309450253000
Re: Interview Program Continues to Find Success
Bruce Burdick
2011-06-30T12:10:53-04:00
2011-06-30T12:10:53-04:00
Online web conferences could be used to significantly raise this interview percentage. Most attorneys would welcome an examiner invite to a web conference prior to first action, particularly if the examiner were to indicate possible patentable subject matter in the invite (without necessarily indicating pre-interview what that subject matter was, and certainly without mandating any such indication, as understandably mandates tend to make everyone involved reluctant). I know I would not turn down any such invite, as turning down such an invite would surely not be in the client's best interest, and not in the best interest of relations with the inviting examiner. I think my colleagues would feel similarly.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/interview_program_continues_to_find#comment-1309392791000
Re: Interview Program Continues to Find Success
Syed
2011-06-29T20:13:11-04:00
2011-06-29T20:13:11-04:00
How useful and applicable are these procedures in expediting of the Ex Parte reexamination proceedings of patents in the PTO?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_pilot_program_to_provide#comment-1308864813000
Re: New Pilot Program to Provide Pro-Bono Legal Assistance to Independent Inventors
Gregory Anderson
2011-06-23T17:33:33-04:00
2011-06-23T17:33:33-04:00
Anyone have any thoughts of anything remotely similar on the West Coast/ Pacific Northwest?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_pilot_program_to_provide#comment-1308654406000
Re: New Pilot Program to Provide Pro-Bono Legal Assistance to Independent Inventors
John Kelly
2011-06-21T07:06:46-04:00
2011-06-21T07:06:46-04:00
is this limited to only the residents of minnesota? and how much is the small fee?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_pilot_program_to_provide#comment-1308642280000
Re: New Pilot Program to Provide Pro-Bono Legal Assistance to Independent Inventors
Robert Sullivan
2011-06-21T03:44:40-04:00
2011-06-21T03:44:40-04:00
Any thought on when or if this pilot program would make it to Atlanta area?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/may_patents_dashboard_overview#comment-1308074843000
Re: May Patents Dashboard Overview
Dal Latsha
2011-06-14T14:07:23-04:00
2011-06-14T14:07:23-04:00
Good Afternoon:
Just a couple of quick questions:
1) Why are there funding constraints in place? Debt ceiling, new legislation for next FY, Detroit Field Office?
2) When do you expect the funding constraints to be lifted (i.e. when will jobs be posted to the USPTO and OPM)?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_communications_and_public#comment-1308061659000
Re: Update on Communications and Public Engagement
Charles
2011-06-14T10:27:39-04:00
2011-06-14T10:27:39-04:00
@ Nickolaus: I agree that the USPTO's online patent search system is pretty weak. However, Google's free search is so good that I do not think the office need bother improving their system, especially with their current budget constraints. Our firm has access to a number of commercial (and I presume expensive) search systems but I still find my self using Google more often than not.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_communications_and_public#comment-1307573618000
Re: Update on Communications and Public Engagement
Nickolaus E. Leggett
2011-06-08T18:53:38-04:00
2011-06-08T18:53:38-04:00
You could improve the USPTO engagement with the public by improving your online patent search system so that it would be similar to the more powerful search systems available at the USPTO public search room. This would help the numerous USPTO users who do not live near this fine resource. When the public can do better patent searches online, they will be more motivated to submit patent applications and these applications will be higher in quality. Since many Americans have high-speed Internet connections, they could use a feature-rich online search system. Good Internet patent searches are a key factor for increased public engagement with the USPTO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/where_academia_meets_real_world#comment-1305753965000
Re: Where Academia Meets Real-World Practice
Attorney fairfax
2011-05-18T17:26:05-04:00
2011-05-18T17:26:05-04:00
Do current law students have a leg up over other applicants at all?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_the_uspto#comment-1305037540000
Re: An Update on the USPTO's FY 2011 Budget
Nickolaus E. Leggett
2011-05-10T10:25:40-04:00
2011-05-10T10:25:40-04:00
This new budget has a very negative impact on the USPTO. This is quite unfortunate because the USPTO is essential for maintaining America as a great power and for building the economy through new inventions and innovations.
Is there any way that those of us outside of the USPTO can help out? For example, could we volunteer to help out with certain USPTO activities? Is there a USPTO group or committee that will consider outsiders' ideas and proposals for new and efficient USPTO operations? Can we assist by writing more compact and clear applications that have already been evaluated in relation to the existing state-of-the-art?
The USPTO is a central component of America's economic defense effort and it needs to be protected.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_the_uspto#comment-1304083332000
Re: An Update on the USPTO's FY 2011 Budget
Anne Barschall
2011-04-29T09:22:12-04:00
2011-04-29T09:22:12-04:00
It was great to hear you speak at the JPPCLE session Wednesday. It sounds like you are doing great work, and I appreciate your efforts.
I wish to offer a suggestion relating to claim drafting practice. Currently, if a claim recites "at least one higglety-pigglety widget," examiners will commonly require that this element be later recited as "the at least one higglety-pigglety widget." I disagree with this practice. Absent ambiguity, the later recitation should be "the widget." This change would make claims more in conformity with normal, plain English, as required by the laws requiring documents be drafted in plain English that some states have enacted. Moreover, the claims will be easier for everyone to understand. In addition, proofing errors, resulting in inconsistent recitations will be reduced.
Thank you for your attention.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/introducing_the_office_of_policy#comment-1304070358000
Re: Introducing the Office of Policy and External Affairs Dashboard
Mitch Weinstein
2011-04-29T05:45:58-04:00
2011-04-29T05:45:58-04:00
Good information. The dashboard provides good insight into the increased use of the PPH, whcih should help support furtheruse by otherwise skeptical clients. Please keep this and other types of information available to practitioners on a regular basis.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/march_dashboard_overview#comment-1303998360000
Re: March Dashboard Overview
Inventor0875
2011-04-28T09:46:00-04:00
2011-04-28T09:46:00-04:00
Director Kappos,
Kudos for the dashboard and for transparency on pendency without RCE-reset.
It would be useful if the dashboard also displayed user-desired target values. The target values might be determined via online voting by registered USPTO users.
For example, the "time to issue" could be shown relative to its target value on a time graph. Congress and the public would have an immediate overview of how the USPTO is doing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_the_uspto#comment-1303542794000
Re: An Update on the USPTO's FY 2011 Budget
Orlando Lopez
2011-04-23T03:13:14-04:00
2011-04-23T03:13:14-04:00
Clearly, our legislators did not read George Will's Jan. 2 op-ed piece or listen to the Kauffman Foundation. There is a connection between patents and emerging companies and between emerging companies and job creation. In the past, there have been calls for a Patent Stimulus package, This is a Patent De-stimulus budget and counter to patent reform
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_the_uspto#comment-1303514312000
Re: An Update on the USPTO's FY 2011 Budget
Massage News
2011-04-22T19:18:32-04:00
2011-04-22T19:18:32-04:00
Just my opinion but I don't think a hiring freeze is a good idea. You're freezing against those new potential employees that are willing to work for less pay. People willing to go the extra mile are not dead.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_the_uspto#comment-1303502062000
Re: An Update on the USPTO's FY 2011 Budget
Ernie Beffel
2011-04-22T15:54:22-04:00
2011-04-22T15:54:22-04:00
This is only a temporary set back. Keep up the great work that you and your team have been doing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_pendency_measures_and_an#comment-1302474963000
Re: New Pendency Measures and an Update on Our Green Tech Program
Michael E. Zall
2011-04-10T18:36:03-04:00
2011-04-10T18:36:03-04:00
Suggestion: One can obtain expedited prosecution for applications when the inventor is over 65. Why not extend this to applications where the principal attorney is over 65? This is particularly significant in small or solo practices.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/impressions_from_sxsw#comment-1302282724000
Re: Impressions from SXSW
Tyron Stading
2011-04-08T13:12:04-04:00
2011-04-08T13:12:04-04:00
We appreciate the visit to Austin, and especially support the USPTO considering the Austin remove office. Austin is one of the top producers of IP in the country, and a source of innovation and entrepreneurship. I am the founder of a software startup in Austin dealing with IP and appreciate the complexities and tradeoffs. We look forward to partnering with you on the new Reform Act as well as being a source of innovation and review for the remote office.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1301219903000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Lawrence Pope
2011-03-27T05:58:23-04:00
2011-03-27T05:58:23-04:00
Dear David, has the USPTO given any thought to whether any changes should be made to the guidelines for handling claims by applicants that a reference publication is the applicant's work which originated with him? I believe that the current guidance comes from In re Katz in which the applicant is a co-author. David Boundy has done a quite interesting article on how independent inventors have a need to make disclosure to VC's that could result in publication of their ideas by another author. Under current law such independent inventors could just swear behind the reference but, of course, S23 will remove that option. Thus the motivation to resort to the In re Katz approach is likely to significantly increase if S23 passes into law and to be used when the applicant is not a co-author.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1300809543000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Dick Liou
2011-03-22T11:59:03-04:00
2011-03-22T11:59:03-04:00
I have commercialized my own invention with sales in domestic and international markets. Thomas Edison was not exaggerating when he stated that inspiration is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration. I would actually peg it at 0.1% inspiration (1/1000th) based on my experience. I can assure you that no one wishes to go through commercialization hell only to have someone else try to take away his profit when the latter has done nothing to deserve it. The FITF system rightly protects the first person to file, who then has the legal protection to pursue commercialization. Keep in mind too that first-to-market is not always an advantage. Those with more resources (e.g. corporations) can afford the IP attorney’s fees and get to market first. Yet if an invention is truly innovative, it would also require much more educating the market and time to acceptance. Independent inventors are an ingenious lot; they can always improve on existing products. Somehow the lack of financial resources for the typical independent inventor has a way of reaping later-to-market advantages especially when it comes to true innovations. This combined with the other logistics and cost advantages already posted in Director Kappos’ blog makes all the sense in the world to do the patent reform. This new system prevents someone from usurping any hard-earned benefits when he has not contributed to the effort. Once again, it's never the product but the business activities behind an invention that makes it successful.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_quality_measure_added_to#comment-1300379247000
Re: New Quality Measure Added to February Dashboard
2011-03-17T12:27:27-04:00
2011-03-17T12:27:27-04:00
The above Comment about CIP applications is an excelllent example of how much of the debate over FTF versut FTI is fueled by confusion as to what the present law and practice really is. No claim in a CIP that is not fully 112 supported by its parent application specification gets any priority filing date benefit from its parent application. Nor is a "first to conceive" alone a completed prior invention. See 35 USC 102(g).
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/impressions_from_sxsw#comment-1300334780000
Re: Impressions from SXSW
Andre Zamith Cardoso
2011-03-17T00:06:20-04:00
2011-03-17T00:06:20-04:00
Thank you for this post. I wish I could be already in your country. I am still a young researcher as perhaps those you've meet. I am a Student Researcher in Germany and Belgium, on the other side of the Ocean... Looking very much into traveling at least once visiting the country who produces more patents in the world...
Have a nice day,
Andre
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_quality_measure_added_to#comment-1300292322000
Re: New Quality Measure Added to February Dashboard
Cathy
2011-03-16T12:18:42-04:00
2011-03-16T12:18:42-04:00
In response to Eurica, that is actually incorrect. The subject matter of Application A2 that was conceived of in 2015 would only be accorded a filing date of 2016 (when A2 is filed, not A1), so any inventor who files an application prior to 2016 claiming subject matter disclosed in A2 would in fact have priority over A2. Applications, even continuation in parts, do not get priority to subject matter not disclosed in the parent.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/impressions_from_sxsw#comment-1300283700000
Re: Impressions from SXSW
Arthur Blair
2011-03-16T09:55:00-04:00
2011-03-16T09:55:00-04:00
Dear Mr. Kappos,
I believe that "Patent Reform" / "America Invents Act" will have a very Negative impact on Innovation and Entrepreneurship in the United States.
It appears that this bill was designed, and is being promoted, by your former employer (IBM) and takes the rights away from independent inventors and small business.
The entirety of Section 118 goes directly against the 'Copyright Clause' which specificly states "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." You will note that it specifically states "to Authors and Inventors". It does not say rights should go to Big Corporations.
This legislation is Bad for Inventors, Bad for Innovation, Bad for Entrepreneurship, Bad for Small Business, and Bad for America.
Below are a few links with good arguments against this flawed legislation
"http://bit.ly/eTsLs9"
"http://huff.to/hyrcig"
"http://bit.ly/gQCzTE"
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/impressions_from_sxsw#comment-1300282059000
Re: Impressions from SXSW
Florian Mueller (author of FOSS Patents)
2011-03-16T09:27:39-04:00
2011-03-16T09:27:39-04:00
Thank you for sharing an interesting perspective. I's true that the open source community must recognize the reality that many others -- companies of all sizes and individual inventors -- seek patents. Unless the open source movement can convince lawmakers that software-related patents should be abolished (which I don't think is going to happen anytime soon), both models must find, and in fact have already found, ways to co-exist. The second sentence of the fourth paragraph is accurate in terms of open source depending on copyright law. This includes the idea of 'copyleft', which would be unenforceable without copyright. However, I would very much like to clarify that open source does not need patent law in any way. It depends solely on copyright law. One important difference between the two IPRs from the perspective of a software developer is that patent infringement is very often inadvertent while software copyright infringement is, not for legal but practical reasons, impossible without an intent to infringe, just like I wouldn not infringe your copyright in your blog post by unintentionally writing a text similar enough to be deemed infringing.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/talking_quality#comment-1300127559000
Re: Talking Quality
Gerald Lemanski
2011-03-14T14:32:39-04:00
2011-03-14T14:32:39-04:00
Dear Mr. Kappos,
I applaud your efforts.
I have been issued 2 patents since 1995 and have a third caught in some young examiner's seem-less web of rejections.
Filing as a small entity status and using a local patent firm. I am meeting with my patent attorney this week to tell him that I am going to abandon my third patent application due to second set of office action rejections. The money is better spent on marketing--and this obstacle combined with a 3 year turn around on simple patents? Not worth it for my industry.
Initially in the first action--we responded all of the examiners concerns diligently. We have been set a second rejection and it seems as though he didn't even read the response at all! He is stuck on the names of the parts and not the actual function of them. Now I am faced with an RCE.
My patent attorney is old school and he is concerned that the young examiners think their job is to reject as many claims as they can--when a decade ago they were helpful and wanted you to get awarded with a quality patent.
Listen, I am all for rejections based on real facts and diligent examination--that is what makes our patents stronger. But why do we have to keep paying all these fees when we initially paid fees to have our patents examined in the first place? I am getting the feeling that it a mere money maker when there are rejections.
Sincerely,
gerald lemanski
frustrated,
application number: SN 11/799,880
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/new_quality_measure_added_to#comment-1299944419000
Re: New Quality Measure Added to February Dashboard
Eurica Califorrniaa
2011-03-12T10:40:19-05:00
2011-03-12T10:40:19-05:00
The Director's enthusiasm for a return to a first-to-file system created by senate bill S.23 is misguided. Even if adopted into law, it is unlikely that the first-to-file system will survive the courts. In a nutshell, there is no way around the fact that rights must be protected on a first-to-conceive basis. For example, Inventor "A" files parent application A1 in 2012, followed in 2016 by continuation-in-part application A2 based on new matter conceived in 2015. Since A2 (filed in 2016) claims the priority of A1 (filed in 2012), under the first-to-file system it would beat out an application by Inventor "B" filed in 2014 based on matter conceived in 2013. Thus, since inventor "A" has a foot-in-the-door with application A1, the first-to-file system unfairly blocks out future competitors on an ongoing basis. On the other hand, if we impose the first-to-conceive rule on the new matter, we are back to the first-to-conceive system! Thus, S.23 reduces to an absurdity.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299605315000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Eurica Califorrniaa
2011-03-08T12:28:35-05:00
2011-03-08T12:28:35-05:00
There is an insoluble dilemma associated with the first-to-file program.
If we allow continuation-in-part applications to retain priority (which S.23 does under 35 U.S.C. 120), then successive continuations-in-part will block out a huge swath of inventions conceived earlier by others but added as new matter by one with an earlier filed parent application. Accordingly, it would make sense for big players to keep a pool of parent applications "floating" around, to make sure that new inventions in the same general field are treated as new matter added to an application with first-to-file priority, rather than running the risk that someone else has already filed.
Thus, the first-to-file system would hurt first time applicants and favor repeat applicants.
On the other hand, if we do not allow continuation-in-part applications to retain priority, then a host of problems will arise as well. For example, technical defects in an application would open the door to someone who was not only second-to-conceive but also second-to-file. Exemplary technical defects include accidental omission of a drawing figure or failure to include the language "implemented by a computer" in a process claim to distinguish it from a mental process.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_symposium_march_11_to#comment-1299517485000
Re: USPTO Symposium March 11 to Bring Together Women Inventors and Entrepreneurs
Elizabeth Golluscio
2011-03-07T12:04:45-05:00
2011-03-07T12:04:45-05:00
Will some of the materials be available from this or another website after the event?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299250581000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
mike
2011-03-04T09:56:21-05:00
2011-03-04T09:56:21-05:00
Any way to remove some of the more controversial amendments tagged on at the end. Especially the ban on Tax Patents (S.23, Sec. 14)?
I am for strong patent rights, patent office control of its own funds, and improving patent quality. Improving patent quality is best accomplished by improving the number of examiners and improving examiner retention time, leading to more experienced examiners at the office. If we improve patent quality it may reduce some of the 3000 IBM patents issued each year, but the ones issued will be innovative and not obvious.
Thanks,
Mike
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299195722000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Eurica Califorrniaa
2011-03-03T18:42:02-05:00
2011-03-03T18:42:02-05:00
Think of an invention like a "baby." A first-to-file system means your baby has no rights until delivered into the hands of the USPTO. But your baby has been growing in the womb of innovation since conception. Suppose we have two women. "A" conceives first, followed by "B." But in order to obtain priority under the first-to-file system being proposed by Senate bill S.23, "B" takes drugs to induce premature delivery. Obviously, a first-to-file system is not healthy for inventions for the same reason premature delivery is not healthy for babies. I oppose passage of S.23 in the Senate because a first-to-file system will put pressure on inventors to delivery their inventions into the hands of the USPTO prematurely in order to obtain priority over inventors who follow the natural course of the invention process.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299173859000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Nickolaus Leggett
2011-03-03T12:37:39-05:00
2011-03-03T12:37:39-05:00
What steps are being taken within the in-house post-grant review system to make sure that parties cannot game the system to shoot down valid applications? One can imagine such a strategy being used to strip new inventions of patent protection.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299158679000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Brian Fletcher
2011-03-03T08:24:39-05:00
2011-03-03T08:24:39-05:00
S.23 increases the scope of invalidating activity in the U.S., i.e., it guts the one-year grace period. Under current law, on sale or public use activity only constitutes prior art if it occurs more than one year before the application filing date. The language of S.23 shows that no grace period would be allowed for pre-filing sales or use. The grace period language in the proposed bill only relates to disclosures.
A person could be prevented from obtaining a U.S. patent, but a patent could still be obtained in other countries. In most foreign jurisdictions public use without enabling disclosure is not a disclosure that defeats the novelty requirement. Not so under S.23. It would create a condition that does not exist under those foreign patent systems - to the detriment of those seeking patent protection in the U.S. It would create an uneven playing field where inventors find that they are more likely to lose patent protection in the U.S. than elsewhere. This is progress?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299114839000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Gerry Elman
2011-03-02T20:13:59-05:00
2011-03-02T20:13:59-05:00
It is imperative that Congress support implementation of computer-assisted patent examination. And there is good news from the House of Representatives. As reported Feb. 13th by The Hill, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va) said that the most likely focus of the House version of “patent reform” would be on “increasing the speed and quality of the patent process,” commenting further that the PTO “doesn’t use enough technology to ensure products are unique and worthy of a new patent, making the process slow and cumbersome.”
It seems to me that Rep. Goodlatte is spot-on. Having come to government service from a career at IBM, you are uniquely qualified to lead us towards this beneficial transformation.
Until the PTO provides a Watson-like analytical infrastructure for patent examiners, it seems to me that the whole patenting process will remain in jeopardy. In the legendary words of Alexander Graham Bell: “Watson, come here. I want you.”
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/patent_reform_good_for_innovation#comment-1299114720000
Re: Patent Reform: Good for Innovation. Good for Small Business. Good for America
Gerry Elman
2011-03-02T20:12:00-05:00
2011-03-02T20:12:00-05:00
To increase patent quality and take a bite out of the backlog, I submit that the process of examining patent claims should be reengineered. Last month Jeopardy! featured a man-machine showdown that piqued the public fancy. An IBM computer, Watson, beat out a couple of human champions. Coincidentally, Alexander Poltorak received notice that his U.S. Patent 7,904,453 for analyzing patent claim validity is to issue March 8th. I don’t know whether '453 is the solution, but isn’t it time that we provide to U.S. patent examiners a tool that presents an organized report of the prior art that’s most pertinent to each element of each claim under examination? In effect - an automated version of the Examination Support Document (“ESD”) that in 2007, the PTO had announced it would require many of us to generate. And cf. the current MPEP 708.02(a). See http://ht.ly/458wj for more on this.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_new_model_for_patent#comment-1298295400000
Re: A New Model for Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries (PTDLs)
Martin Wallace
2011-02-21T08:36:40-05:00
2011-02-21T08:36:40-05:00
Where can I find the transcript from this meeting? Thanks, Martin
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/national_trademark_expo_to_be#comment-1297088608000
Re: National Trademark Expo to be Held October 15-16 at USPTO
christopher low
2011-02-07T09:23:28-05:00
2011-02-07T09:23:28-05:00
Why not use the Patent & Trademark Depository libraries for a broader purpose, e.g., a set of focal point locations for a nationwide workforce?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_key_patent_processes_and#comment-1296388287000
Re: Improving Key Patent Processes and Sub-processes
Nickolaus E. Leggett
2011-01-30T06:51:27-05:00
2011-01-30T06:51:27-05:00
Perhaps we should not initially examine patent applications at all. In this system, the applications would be issued as claimed inventions by the USPTO. When a claimed invention is actually challenged in court, the USPTO would then conduct a detailed examination of it as well as the challenger's evidence.
This system would delay examinations until the claimed patents are actually challenged in court recognizing the fact that a patent is a "license to sue", and saving USPTO examination labor for only those inventions that are actually challenged.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_gets_agile#comment-1295956112000
Re: USPTO Gets Agile
Jose Nunez
2011-01-25T06:48:32-05:00
2011-01-25T06:48:32-05:00
I can't believe that the word "patent" does not appear in the "25 point plan" document. Business needs should drive the IT strategy, but this seems more like a business strategy written by IT managers that have no clue about patents and our needs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1295681897000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Joseph
2011-01-22T02:38:17-05:00
2011-01-22T02:38:17-05:00
I think this is a great idea - if you can couple it with a simple but through search capability so that others can both search for other marks as well as compare theirs to ensure it is not already in use (I know this is done now - but, it needs to be easier and quicker). Or, have your system spider the web and try to find duplicate marks (our mark has changed as it has been copied several times - see http://www.businessmoneytoday.com - some we have found and some we have not YET).
But, I like the idea of using cloud computing and streamline the system - anything to help business owners get moving faster.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_key_patent_processes_and#comment-1295460116000
Re: Improving Key Patent Processes and Sub-processes
LoTempio Law Blog
2011-01-19T13:01:56-05:00
2011-01-19T13:01:56-05:00
[Trackback] The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) granted an all-time high 219,614 United States utility patents in 2010 &ndash; up 31 percent over 2009. All but one of the companies in the Top 50 are up from 2009, most...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_key_patent_processes_and#comment-1295171630000
Re: Improving Key Patent Processes and Sub-processes
Vincent LoTempio
2011-01-16T04:53:50-05:00
2011-01-16T04:53:50-05:00
The USPTO granted at all-time high number of 219,614 United States utility patents in 2010 – up 31 percent over 2009 – a sign that innovation is not slowed by recession? Or is it a sign that United States patent and trademark office is becoming more efficient at prosecuting patent applications and the increased number of patent examiners are reducing the back load of patent applications?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_key_patent_processes_and#comment-1294718541000
Re: Improving Key Patent Processes and Sub-processes
PharmaPatents
2011-01-10T23:02:21-05:00
2011-01-10T23:02:21-05:00
[Trackback] In a recent post on his blog, Director Kappos discussed the progress the USTPO has made towards improving patent processes. He reports that in fiscal year 2010 the USPTO "[e]ntered more than 2.9 million documents." Now, he doesn't categorize these doc...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/taking_steps_to_improve_patent#comment-1294287076000
Re: Taking Steps to Improve Patent Quality
PharmaPatents
2011-01-05T23:11:16-05:00
2011-01-05T23:11:16-05:00
[Trackback] In In re Glatt Air Techniques, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a decision of the U.S. Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences that held a claim obvious. The decision is remarkable in that it overturned the Board under the deferential "substantial ...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1293912016000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
HPS Grow Lights
2011-01-01T15:00:16-05:00
2011-01-01T15:00:16-05:00
Great to hear it from the source what the reasons and ramifications are..
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/expanding_our_communications_and_public#comment-1293885559000
Re: Expanding our Communications and Public Engagement
Securing Innovation
2011-01-01T07:39:19-05:00
2011-01-01T07:39:19-05:00
[Trackback] At year end, it's customary for bloggers to review the state of the blogosphere, often with focus on a particular niche or area of interest. Such was the case recently when lists were compiled of the Top Patent Blogs and...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/expanding_our_communications_and_public#comment-1293660855000
Re: Expanding our Communications and Public Engagement
Bob Sayre
2010-12-29T17:14:15-05:00
2010-12-29T17:14:15-05:00
The availability of the email subscriptions is welcome news. Thanks for continuing to reach out to the community and improve communication. Can the USPTO now also provide RSS feeds (thanks for providing them for your blog, at least) for each of these channels for those of us who prefer to process our news that way?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/expansion_of_the_uspto_s#comment-1293102602000
Re: Expansion of the USPTOβs Green Technology Pilot
Tom Ciesielka
2010-12-23T06:10:02-05:00
2010-12-23T06:10:02-05:00
Dear Mr. Kappos, After reading this blog post on new developments with your Green Technology Pilot program, I thought you should know about IP attorney Paul Craane. For almost a year, he’s been touting what the program means to businesses and innovators. His thoughts on your program have been picked up in: Biofuels Journal , IP Frontline, and Environmental Leader.
Best regards,
Tom C.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/great_progress_on_goals#comment-1293098006000
Re: Great Progress on Goals
Kevin
2010-12-23T04:53:26-05:00
2010-12-23T04:53:26-05:00
Great post Bob. Really informative!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1292864552000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
sharkaz
2010-12-20T12:02:32-05:00
2010-12-20T12:02:32-05:00
Terrific idea to make use of the wiki concept. Please keep the community authored material separately identified from the official USPTO authored material. Each official MPEP section could have a single link to the corresponding wiki section. Encourage examiners to contribute. A wiki could make us all better.
Regards,
www.translation-of-contracts.co.uk/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/great_progress_on_goals#comment-1292238324000
Re: Great Progress on Goals
Dennis Crouch
2010-12-13T06:05:24-05:00
2010-12-13T06:05:24-05:00
Thanks Bob.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1291102246000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Philip Anderson
2010-11-30T02:30:46-05:00
2010-11-30T02:30:46-05:00
Director Kappos, As what you have said, you and your staff are working to ensure the balance and fairness of post-grant review. I would just like to add that your ongoing efforts are much appreciated. Thank you for this very informative forum that you have provided. Best regards, Philip Anderson, http://www.jaspercontractorsinc.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1290879616000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Gary Pellett
2010-11-27T12:40:16-05:00
2010-11-27T12:40:16-05:00
Director,
Thanks for giving us the opportunity to comment. We are plant breeders who fiile 15-20 pro sea plant patents each year.
The forms for the applications perplex us. Many of the forms that we can download as pdfs from the USPTO have very short duration. For instance, PTO/SB/03 (05-08) Approved for use through 09/30/2010. OMB 0651-0032 is already expired. This form is the PLANT PATENT APPLICATION (35 U.S.C.DECLARATION (37 CFR 1.63) form. The previous version of this form wasPTO/SB/03 (07-07)Approved for use through 06/30/2010. OMB 0651-0032. Usually, we can see a difference between an older form and its replacement. It may seem like a small matter, however we often need to update a number of the forms each time we make an application, as part of the forms have expired. We understand that if we use an outdated form, we might have a portion or all of our application rejected. Please have the persons responsible for these forms make them with longer durations.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/expansion_of_the_uspto_s#comment-1290521411000
Re: Expansion of the USPTOβs Green Technology Pilot
Mike
2010-11-23T09:10:11-05:00
2010-11-23T09:10:11-05:00
Hi Mr. Kappos, I've been eargerly waiting for news regarding your proposed three-track patent processing system but there hasn't been any updates on this yet. I really liked the idea since it allowed individuals like me to able to get a patent asap and begin working on the company. Can you please update everybody on the status of that program/proposal?
Thanks!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/proposed_rulemaking_to_simplify_and#comment-1289849991000
Re: Proposed Rulemaking to Simplify and Streamline Ex Parte Appeals
David Boundy
2010-11-15T14:39:51-05:00
2010-11-15T14:39:51-05:00
Director Kappos:
Thanks. This is a HUGE improvement. Most importantly, it reflects a complete shift in attitude - instead of viewing applicants/appellants as the enemy, to be hobbled under ever limit the PTO can devise, this is designed to get to the right answer as quickly as we all can.
There are more than a few problems, some of them quite major, of non-compliance with administrative rule making law, but that's teachable once the PTO demonstrates that it wants to learn and comply, and I think this makes that demonstration. There are also some ripple effects that flow back to §§ 131/132 prosecution that need to be ironed out, but that's also well within the range of fixable.
We're all looking forward to working together. Thanks.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1289312795000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Haskel
2010-11-09T09:26:35-05:00
2010-11-09T09:26:35-05:00
Hi David,
It is great to see the USPTO focusing on this. Last time I filed for a trademark I used one of those online sites that you pay about $200 to file for you. It seemed pretty ridiculous to have to pay that much to them for just basically setting up a user friendly site that is easier to use than USPTO's site. According to them they simplify and cut down the registration time by about an hour. And I think it is true because when I tried filing it myself on USPTO's site I didn't even know where to start.
I think a good idea to start would be to actually look on these sites that offer the service and do it even better than them. Recently I opened a new business http://handtrucks2go.com/ and I am just too cheap too pay these guys again. I would love to see a simplified USPTO site that would save myself and so many other people money.
Thanks for your good work!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1288846978000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Richard in Paris
2010-11-04T01:02:58-04:00
2010-11-04T01:02:58-04:00
I find that the biggest task is the implementing the new on a global scale. Trademarks will continue to dominate our futures and legal procedures until a global system can be forged out by agencies such as the OECD. Good article I will keep an eye out for any updates.www.alacarte-paris-apartments.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_three_track_proposal_putting#comment-1288810160000
Re: The Three-Track Proposal: Putting Applicants in Control of Examination Timing
Inventor0875
2010-11-03T14:49:20-04:00
2010-11-03T14:49:20-04:00
An enhancement to Fast Examination (revision to my previous post): The Patent Office provides fast patents but with an Applicant option to schedule/delay public disclosure of the patent for up to at least 18 months (from filing). For example, an Applicant receives patent(s) in 3 months (using lots of long interviews) on quality independent and backup claims. Applicant could then “persuade/sell” investors with known claims (credibility; value; & lower IP risk), along with 15 months of stealth/first-mover advantage (lower short-term competitor risk & possibility of greater reward). This combination would help start-ups to obtain/increase funding and succeed in bringing the innovation to market as first-mover. Enhanced Fast-track now becomes a U.S. competitive advantage.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/taking_steps_to_improve_patent#comment-1287840579000
Re: Taking Steps to Improve Patent Quality
Harry Taylor
2010-10-23T09:29:39-04:00
2010-10-23T09:29:39-04:00
Talk about clearly communicating one's position.
One Applicant would suggest that patent examination quality could be vastly improved if Examiners were not allowed to make rejections without providing the necessary factual underpinning, only personal opinion. Currently, I have an attorney, who is not a PHOSITA in the subject area, arguing against an Examiner's personal opinion as the examiner is not a PHOSITA in the subject area either. Examination progress stalls and unescessary Applicant cash is consumed when each side is arguing personal opinion only, and not any facts? Perhaps someone can answer this question?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_2010_2015_strategic_plan#comment-1287823992000
Re: USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan Released
baskar
2010-10-23T04:53:12-04:00
2010-10-23T04:53:12-04:00
very nice your blog.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/coming_soon_draft_uspto_2010#comment-1287770765000
Re: Coming Soon: Draft USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan
Joey Ugochukwu Ofili
2010-10-22T14:06:05-04:00
2010-10-22T14:06:05-04:00
I really appreciate this site. It has enabled me to travel through the right path. I AM AN INVENTOR because of you all.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1287599871000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Greg Collins
2010-10-20T14:37:51-04:00
2010-10-20T14:37:51-04:00
It seems like a good idea to update the system. But what a huge task!
Greg Collins
http://techsupportnerds.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/taking_steps_to_improve_patent#comment-1287582674000
Re: Taking Steps to Improve Patent Quality
ww
2010-10-20T09:51:14-04:00
2010-10-20T09:51:14-04:00
Re "clearly communicating the Examiner's position", I find that the "broadest reasonable interpretation" of a term is the source of much back-and-forth which could be avoided if the Examiner would only point out when she thinks her interpretation might be broader than Applicants', and would then state what her interpretation is. More often than not, I can resolve all issues just by changing the claim term to one that says what I originally meant, but maybe more clearly, thereby satisfying everyone. Interviews are an excellent way to ferret out "broadest reasonable interpretation" issues, and I greatly appreciate the greater enthusiasm I've experienced with Examiners recently in conducting interviews. But what's the harm in pointing out broad interpretations right there in the office action? I *still* find some examiners intentionally "hiding the ball" on interpretations, and cannot fathom what they hope to gain by doing so. Thank you
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1287354850000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Jerome Tatler
2010-10-17T18:34:10-04:00
2010-10-17T18:34:10-04:00
I cant wait for the system to be implement. At this age and time, speed is the new king and we all want instantaneous information. Trademarks is going to be a huge thing in the future.
Kudos to your project and good luck!
http://www.rebuildingmarriage.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1287016198000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Daniel
2010-10-13T20:29:58-04:00
2010-10-13T20:29:58-04:00
Yes, cloud computing can be really useful but I am not sure how it can be useful to the trademark process. In my mind, a person filing for a trademark has one or two trademarks in his mind. Then they search the TESS database to find a hit. Maybe a cloud computing API might be useful to someone who has a lot of trademarks that needs to be verified in TESS. But does that happen in real life? Am I missing something here?
Daniel.
http://www.halfup.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1286969404000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
John Ward
2010-10-13T07:30:04-04:00
2010-10-13T07:30:04-04:00
I agree that the process of obtaining a patent needs to be simplified to encourage enterprise and ideas for business growth. After all our economy desperately needs to encourage and help the businesses, large and small.
Any effort along this path is to be encouraged.
http://www.babyboomersinternetjourney.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1286898351000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Bill
2010-10-12T11:45:51-04:00
2010-10-12T11:45:51-04:00
Utilizing the latest technology to better manage your office only makes sense and better serves those who access it. I would favor any and all upgrades that can be done and still provide a secure environment for accessing your information.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_reexamination_process#comment-1286848302000
Re: Improving the Reexamination Process
tuneup2011
2010-10-11T21:51:42-04:00
2010-10-11T21:51:42-04:00
The notice acknowledges that to the extent MPEP § 2240 has been amended to require a substantial new question of patent ability as a prerequisite to granting a second request for reexamination, “a patent owner will now be prevented from obtaining entry of an amendment and/or evidence not entered after final rejection … by filing another request for reexamination based on the same substantial question of patent ability.”
http://tuneup2011.net
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_year_in_review_and#comment-1286481607000
Re: USPTO Year in Review - And a Look Forward
Motorized Drum Dumpers
2010-10-07T16:00:07-04:00
2010-10-07T16:00:07-04:00
Congrats for completing one year and so. I have found many posts interesting and helpful. Keep posting...
Thanks,
Andrew
http://www.easylifteqpt.com/product/drum-haulers_with_lift,_clamp_and_side_or_forward_rotation/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1286311138000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
AJF 12
2010-10-05T16:38:58-04:00
2010-10-05T16:38:58-04:00
oooh this is exciting! I am going to submit... :) Good luck to all the applicants, I can't wait to see who is chosen!
<a href="http://www.airjordans.cc/jordan-ajf12-31/">AJF 12</a>
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_three_track_proposal_putting#comment-1286212963000
Re: The Three-Track Proposal: Putting Applicants in Control of Examination Timing
Ray Grogan
2010-10-04T13:22:43-04:00
2010-10-04T13:22:43-04:00
Sounds good. Track 1 for speed, or Track 2 for economy. Extra sweet that the speedsters will help pay for us more parsimonious types. Good to have some choices open to all.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_year_in_review_and#comment-1286197712000
Re: USPTO Year in Review - And a Look Forward
drow
2010-10-04T09:08:32-04:00
2010-10-04T09:08:32-04:00
I'd also encourage you to look into software patents. It seems like every week, another company is sued by someone holding a patent for a software process which clearly fails either the obvious method or prior art standards, or which are too broadly written, but which was awarded nonetheless. As often, the plaintiff is a 'patent troll', an individual or organization which acquires these sorts of junk patents for the express purpose of filing lawsuits.
The software industry moves fast, and everything may change dramatically every few years. The existing patent framework does not seem well-suited to it.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reducing_pendency_through_worksharing_and#comment-1286038612000
Re: Reducing Pendency through Worksharing and Acceleration Programs
Courtenay Brinckerhoff
2010-10-02T12:56:52-04:00
2010-10-02T12:56:52-04:00
"The first chart outlines the major worksharing initiatives at the USPTO and includes some information on programs administered by JPO and EPO. The second chart outlines all of our domestic acceleration programs and proposals and includes information as to when applicants may request expedited examination."
The 2 documents linked in these sentences appear to be the same - both appear to be the "major worksharing initiatives."
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reducing_pendency_through_worksharing_and#comment-1286012264000
Re: Reducing Pendency through Worksharing and Acceleration Programs
Louis Ventre
2010-10-02T05:37:44-04:00
2010-10-02T05:37:44-04:00
Compliments on finally recognizing the work of other patent offices.
This should be taken a step further. Is there some reason why USPTO could not implement procedures to take admininstrative notice of the other office's action and automatically recognize the work of the other patent office?
This could be done either in the regular order when the U.S. application is taken up by the examiner. Or, in addition, the USPTO and the reviewing office could send a notice to each other when a positive report is made and then implement the PPH program automatically.
The two charts are hyperlinked to the identical pdf chart. If there are two charts, then this shoudl be corrected.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1286004054000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Buzz Hill
2010-10-02T03:20:54-04:00
2010-10-02T03:20:54-04:00
It is about time to let TradeMark holders manage their trademarks online. Finally, the USPTO is moving into the 21st Century. I specialize on new Cyber Tools for the 21st Century and this is a move in the right direction. http://buzzhillmarketing.wordpress.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1285939871000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
Engagement Expert
2010-10-01T09:31:11-04:00
2010-10-01T09:31:11-04:00
I just don't see how this could be achieved without a written description. Even our children in school have to write out what they did over their summer holidays once they get back to school. Surely inventors can summarize and clearly describe their work in a detailed written description. Bravo! http://www.engagementexperts.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_year_in_review_and#comment-1285848973000
Re: USPTO Year in Review - And a Look Forward
Wayne Castleberry
2010-09-30T08:16:13-04:00
2010-09-30T08:16:13-04:00
Director David Kappos,
I want to personally thank you for your leadership in getting the issues resolved with America's innovation backlog at the USPTO. It appears the USPTO employees are working as hard as you to make changes. It is a good feeling to read your comments and as an employer I support my staff as a team. I am sure it is not easy to capture control of a federal department and move it into the future.
If you could be so kind as to respond to the letter I sent you in regards to my patents it would be appriciated.
Wayne Castleberry
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1285736146000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Christopher "European Domain" Hofman
2010-09-29T00:55:46-04:00
2010-09-29T00:55:46-04:00
Totally agree. International domain registrations are also moving towards automatization after years of documentation and manual handling for no apparent reason.
Christopher Hofman
European Domain Centre
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1285657550000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
Dave Rodack
2010-09-28T03:05:50-04:00
2010-09-28T03:05:50-04:00
A possible source of unnecessary RCEs is in the context of submitting an IDS in a case where the issue fee has been paid yet later re-opened based on citing new art or a new OA in a related (e.g., via family, subject matter) second case. The art/OA may have little to no relevance to the allowed claims, or the Examiner may have already previously reviewed it off record. Yet, in view of McKesson and recent inequitable conduct cases, and despite the obligation imposed by Rule 1.56 to disclose information merely material to patentability, many attorneys are reluctant to make an evaluation of the art/OA for materiality in favor of the conservative approach of simply citing everything that comes their way and let the PTO decide. It would be interesting to see a statistic from the PTO of how many post-issue fee payment RCEs are filed. A quick solution may be to make the cut-off date for citation in an IDS based on citations in a related case the date of the issue fee payment.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/greater_transparency_introducing_the_uspto#comment-1285166440000
Re: Greater Transparency: Introducing the USPTO Data Visualization Center and the Patents Dashboard
Paul Fordenbacher
2010-09-22T10:40:40-04:00
2010-09-22T10:40:40-04:00
Great tool! I would love to see PCT-related info as well. I have been using S. Korea as my ISA because of their speed based on data a few years old (seems to be taking a bit longer now). Would like to know recent data for the speed of completion of the ISR-WO (requested way before as well as at the 12 months from priority date) for the US ISA.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1284911195000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Paul Morin
2010-09-19T11:46:35-04:00
2010-09-19T11:46:35-04:00
Director Kappos, what you and your staff do for entrepreneurs is much appreciated. I find myself going to the Uspto.gov site a lot more these days. Now that we are living in a society where ideas and intellectual property often times have far greater value than "hard assets", an office such as yours and a user-friendly site such as that of Uspto.gov increases greatly in importance. Regards, Paul Morin http://www.companyfounder.com.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1284762057000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Stephen With Surveys That Pay Money
2010-09-17T18:20:57-04:00
2010-09-17T18:20:57-04:00
I have no idea how to trademark anything because I've never really checked it out. Right from the start I just think it's totally confusing, but if it was put online I would probably start checking it out. I would maybe even get my own trademark. It would be even better if they made a facebook application for it... That last statement was a joke. http://www.dollarhauler.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/greater_transparency_introducing_the_uspto#comment-1283940631000
Re: Greater Transparency: Introducing the USPTO Data Visualization Center and the Patents Dashboard
Louis Ventre
2010-09-08T06:10:31-04:00
2010-09-08T06:10:31-04:00
Very useful info. I would also like to see a gauge showing time from Notice of Appeal to a decision by the BPAI.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/talking_quality#comment-1283725247000
Re: Talking Quality
Kip Werking
2010-09-05T18:20:47-04:00
2010-09-05T18:20:47-04:00
Dear Director Kappos,
Congratulations on the amazing work that you have done so far. Here are my tips for improving patent quality:
1. Train new examiners to examine like primaries. Practitioners like myself can immediately tell the difference between OAs by new examiners and primaries. New examiners issue gigantic Office Actions, that object to every technicality, and issue often incomprehensible 103 rejections over 3 or 4 references. Primaries, on the other hand, ignore almost all requirements except the core requirements (102/103/112), and issue brief rejections over 1 or 2 references that are much more on point.
In other words, primaries show that new examiners are wasting time on technicalities that are not important to improving patent quality.
2. I would provide continuing education for examiners. Instead of putting examiners in the Academy, and then completely retraining them when they got on the job, allow them to take classes/credits/seminars to sharpen their skills after the Academy. These classes can focus on their technical areas, as well as on BPAI decisions showing when rejections are proper and improper. Ideally, the Examining Corps should be reviewing many or most of the new BPAI decisions issued every week.
3. Create incentives for good patent quality. Examiners are paid a salary as long as they make their counts. However, it is pretty common to see improper rejections overturned, either by the Examiner before appeal, by the Pre-Appeal conference panel, or by the Examiner after the Appeal Brief is filed. Some figures suggest that roughly 90% of appeals fail, including those that never make it to the board. Even if that figure is a little too high, it seems clear to me that there is not enough disincentive for examiners to issue bad rejections. Sometimes these are just called "shotgun" actions - i.e. if the examiner is pressed for time, and just plans on writing a real OA later.
Another way to use incentives, is to offer incentives to applicants and examiners to report good and bad examination. That could prompt an investigation, and if the investigation supports the allegation, there could be a modest reward. As scholars have noted, there is a huge variation in examiner quality. The PTO should track who the good examiners are, and who the bad examiners are, including the ones that have poor English skills, and monitor them carefully (and reward the good ones).
I have personal experience with one SPE who repeatedly refused to allow virtually any applications, and whose examiners told us so in person, even if the rejections were over 7+ references (and the examiner believed it was allowable). In response, many Japanese clients just abandoned applications, or filed countless RCEs and amendments, because they didn't trust the examiner or the appeal process.
Of course, there are difficulties implementing the idea of reporting bad examination. But the general idea is that creating incentives to improve patent quality will affect the Examining Corps.
4. I would work with a software development firm to develop software to automate and streamline a lot of patent prosecution work - i.e. to significantly upgrade PAIR. The software could eliminate a lot of typing/keying errors resulting from sending and scanning lots of paper back and forth. I would be glad to discuss these software development ideas with you more off the public record at your convenience.
Kip Werking
Reg. No.: 60,187
(757) 645-5281
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/talking_quality#comment-1283632786000
Re: Talking Quality
Bob Logan
2010-09-04T16:39:46-04:00
2010-09-04T16:39:46-04:00
dear mr kappos about two months ago i submitted a suggestion as to how the approved us patents by us citizens could be enhanced by getting the department of commerce and the small business us agency involved in not only assisting the inventors many who are great innovators but lousy business people but also creating jobs for the substantial amount of unemployed people in the usa did you have an opportunity to look at it or have one of your associates check it out i have been on the phone with several of the people associated with the uspto the small business bureau and the department of commerce I have been ignored i guess that is not too unusual I think that you are great in how you are changing the uspto to a well oiled machine congratulations this is not ak ing just recognizing what efforts you are contributing very unusual for one who works for the government bob loganpresident senduzy corp
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_note_of_thanks_to#comment-1282581361000
Re: A note of thanks to the team
Nickolaus Leggett
2010-08-23T12:36:01-04:00
2010-08-23T12:36:01-04:00
As a customer of the USPTO, I am impressed by the high quality of the USPTO staff. I hope that you will develop ways to reward your staff for their excellent work. This could include pay increases, bonus pay, special recognition, expanded professional tuition assistance, and opportunities to present papers at conferences and professional journals. It would also be worthwhile to examine possible structures to allow patent examiners to obtain their own patents without problems of a conflict of interest.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1282468090000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
William B. Doyle
2010-08-22T05:08:10-04:00
2010-08-22T05:08:10-04:00
Director Kappos, I just wanted to express my appreciation for your obvious ongoing efforts and the beaucratic nightmare you face. What a challenge! Keep leaning forward, sir! Very Respectfully, William B. Doyle, http://www.wbdoyle.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_note_of_thanks_to#comment-1282297300000
Re: A note of thanks to the team
Inna Kuznetsova
2010-08-20T05:41:40-04:00
2010-08-20T05:41:40-04:00
David, I heard your interview on NPR. It was very interesting even for those not filing patents! Glad to hear about the exciting changes you drive in your new office!
Inna Kuznetsova
VP, Systems Software, IBM
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_uspto_s#comment-1282228140000
Re: An Update on USPTOβs FY 2010 Spending Authority
patent litigation
2010-08-19T10:29:00-04:00
2010-08-19T10:29:00-04:00
Great news that the President has signed this into law. The Obama administration's consistent support of IP demonstrates that it understands the importance of patent law in improving the state of the economy. I can only hope that the President will take up the issue of patent reform!
http://www.aminn.org/webcast-aipr-patent-reform-presentation-us-patent-and-trademark-office
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/a_note_of_thanks_to#comment-1282228039000
Re: A note of thanks to the team
patent litigation
2010-08-19T10:27:19-04:00
2010-08-19T10:27:19-04:00
I have yet to encounter anyone in the IP blogosphere -- or anywhere else, for that matter -- who has expressed anything other than respect and appreciation for your efforts as Director of the USPTO. Indeed, it is you whom we exhort to keep up the great work!
http://www.aminn.org/webcast-aipr-patent-reform-presentation-us-patent-and-trademark-office
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1282153883000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Montana Flynn
2010-08-18T13:51:23-04:00
2010-08-18T13:51:23-04:00
I just build a website that automates the copyright registration process, but this sounds like it would have made my life much easier.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1282001807000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Daniel@SEOvictoria
2010-08-16T19:36:47-04:00
2010-08-16T19:36:47-04:00
I just wanted to post a short note on how delighted I am to see changes occurring at Trademarks regarding the "complete end-to-end electronic processing internally and externally." I trust that the earmarked project Trademarks New Gengeration" will provide a system that is quicker, and a lot more practical for the end users. I am sure it will be much more reliable us the users and your staff.
Sincerely,
Daniel Tétreault.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1281699281000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
examiner performance
2010-08-13T07:34:41-04:00
2010-08-13T07:34:41-04:00
Many examiners are highly competent, and most RCEs are necessary steps toward resolving honest disagreements about the prior art or the scope of claims. However, a significant fraction of unnecessary RCEs could be eliminated if only there were an effective program to discipline and re-educate (or just terminate) those few examiners who consistently do a sloppy, blatantly hasty job on each and every case before them. All practitioners know of the OED, and that knowledge presumably helps to rein-in impulses toward egregious behavior in prosecution. Where is the equivalent office for examiners? Are examiners aware that such an office exists? How can practitioners contact that office? Even more important, where is the "corps" mentality that would make the many good examiners feel some obligation to get rid of the lazy count-gamers?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1281360417000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
David Kostuch
2010-08-09T09:26:57-04:00
2010-08-09T09:26:57-04:00
If it is at all possible for an invention to be stolen, one would think that the marketing, publishing, and selling of the product one year before applying for a patent should be of no good as a rule. I continue to invent because it is a talent, I do not want to give that up. With using a computer to keep order of my inventions, I am now at a point where I wonder if I am going to be a slave to my work due to hackers.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1281094607000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Ernest Morse
2010-08-06T07:36:47-04:00
2010-08-06T07:36:47-04:00
Awesome idea! I believe we should all harness the power of the internet and the vast capabilities it has to make everyone's life easier. I know that being able to track my trademark's processing status would be a great addition to the system. I especially like the online registration.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280851687000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
BeeHiveTech.com
2010-08-03T12:08:07-04:00
2010-08-03T12:08:07-04:00
Absolutely! I think all processes like registering business names, or trademarks, patents, all needs to be online in this day in age. Everything is moving to the 'cloud' for good reason. It works. It makes sense to have all that data accessible from anywhere, and searchable by the WWW. Just my thoughts.
Ryan - BeeHiveTech.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_uspto_s#comment-1280851356000
Re: An Update on USPTOβs FY 2010 Spending Authority
Nickolaus E. Leggett
2010-08-03T12:02:36-04:00
2010-08-03T12:02:36-04:00
The legal structure should be set up so that the USPTO keeps every dollar in fees that it collects. USPTO fees are user fees that the applicant pays in return for professional services from the USPTO. No USPTO fee income should be used elsewhere in the government. If this basic principle is not followed, then there is a question about the level of the fees charged. How can you determine if they are too high or too low when some of the fee income is used by other governmental activities? If by chance, the USPTO were to make a "profit" on its fees, the excess could be reinvested in USPTO infrastructure, employee training, and/or USPTO experimental projects. This would set the USPTO with finances like those of a non-profit corporation, and it would allow everyone to fairly judge the level of USPTO fees.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/an_update_on_uspto_s#comment-1280783406000
Re: An Update on USPTOβs FY 2010 Spending Authority
PharmaPatents
2010-08-02T17:10:06-04:00
2010-08-02T17:10:06-04:00
[Trackback] In a blog post published August 2, 2010, Director Kappos announced the passage of legislation that will give the USPTO the authority to spend an additional $129 million in the current fiscal year, which ends September 30, 2010. The USPTO...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280764750000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
traiann
2010-08-02T11:59:10-04:00
2010-08-02T11:59:10-04:00
david, a function like the one you're mentioning "automated “watch” service to notify requestors of status changes in applications and registrations" will be welcomed. only if we had that in the past... :( cheers, traian @ www.pitstopmedia.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280734438000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Charli Mobile
2010-08-02T03:33:58-04:00
2010-08-02T03:33:58-04:00
Please ignore my previous comment- I submitted before I'd finished!
I agree with Michael that there must be a way to link TEAS with trademark docketing systems so we need not enter data twice. I also think that Erik raises a very valid point in saying that one should format all USPTO trademark pages for mobile browsers- seeing as 5x more people are using phones than the internet, this seems a very sensible way of making everything as accessible as possible http://mobilemonopolyonline.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1280690679000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
David Boundy
2010-08-01T15:24:39-04:00
2010-08-01T15:24:39-04:00
I also observe a major decrease in the quality of Office Actions - much less careful consideration of claim language, actual content of references. and the legal step-by-step set out in the MPEP. Examiners wing it far more often than 10 years ago. Two possible contributors: (a) the IFW. Before 2003, examiners had to type claims, with the IFW they don't. I think (I can't know, but it sure seems to be the case) that this reduces the opportunity for careful thought. (b) PG Pubs with paragraph numbers instead of column and line numbers. When an examiner only has to cite a paragraph number instead of a column, line number, and reference number, the care of analysis falls. I recommend switching PG pubs back to column and line number - that would cost nothing, and lead to better examination.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280673524000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
San Diego Real Estate Agent
2010-08-01T10:38:44-04:00
2010-08-01T10:38:44-04:00
I realize it is not your business to police it, but perhaps a useful extended service, possibly even one that can readily be monitized, would be to help trademark owners know when someone is infringing on their rights. Maybe it would be a service as simple as a list of the webpages on which the trademark name is found. Effectively a google links kind of service. http://www.SanDiegosFinestRealEstate.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280643740000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Brian
2010-08-01T02:22:20-04:00
2010-08-01T02:22:20-04:00
I certainly approve of the direction planned by David as this is something that is both timely and necessary.
However, there is another issue that should perhaps be evaluated as a part of the future mandate of all such title claim registrations.
As registrations are fee accompanied in exchange for an ‘originality title claim' I feel the Patent Office should thus become a party to the security of same against possible abuse or piracy.
Surely it is reasonable that the Patent Office should be supportive where a possible breach is encountered (anyone in any country misusing the registered owners title claim details), where upon request it might lodge an Injunctive Order against the offender that can ONLY be dislodged by a Court Order without costs.
This would provide value where any attempting to breach rightful registration would be blocked by your office by an automatic injunction which would require a self funded Court Order to remove it. http://www.wiper-wizard.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1280628118000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
J. Smith
2010-07-31T22:01:58-04:00
2010-07-31T22:01:58-04:00
The primary reason for RCEs that I see are bad rejections that are maintained on final despite the errors being pointed out. These are often miraculously withdrawn when the same errors are pointed out and an RCE is filed. The primary cause of RCEs is poor quality examination - something that the USPTO has not adequately addressed, particularly in the biological sciences. The doubling of "RCE inventory" suggests that the recent changes to RCE practice have hardly been helpful to the Office's customers.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280624039000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
kazanganti
2010-07-31T20:53:59-04:00
2010-07-31T20:53:59-04:00
I think that most registrations that were not renewed on time should continue to be considered as registered online even after their grace period expired. http://www.direct-2you.com/storm8
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280590385000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Stuart Crawford
2010-07-31T11:33:05-04:00
2010-07-31T11:33:05-04:00
Good to see you guys moving in the direction of the cloud and virtualization. It has been a huge topic of discussion around our HTG Peer Groups and other IT circles (ConnectWise, AutoTask etc).
Good Luck
Stuart Crawford
http://www.ulistic.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1280531689000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
tungsten wedding band
2010-07-30T19:14:49-04:00
2010-07-30T19:14:49-04:00
The written description allows the inventor to clearly explain how his or her invention actually works.<a href="http://tocoy.net">Tungsten Wedding band</a>I don't have a problem with that requirement.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ex_parte_frye_bpai_s#comment-1280520603000
Re: Ex Parte Frye: BPAIβs Standard of Review of Examinersβ Rejections
http://www.ladygaganewestsong.com
2010-07-30T16:10:03-04:00
2010-07-30T16:10:03-04:00
You can hope that another set of eyes look at this but that is not always the case and the original opinion stands.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280519076000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Scott Foley
2010-07-30T15:44:36-04:00
2010-07-30T15:44:36-04:00
I notice this blog was posted March 22, 2010. Has there been any advances or decisions made since? It sure would be nice to have this available via mobile. I agree with Mobile Marketing, I feel anything that is available via the internet should be phone friendly as well.
www.scottfoleymultimedia.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280497619000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Vat Thilek
2010-07-30T09:46:59-04:00
2010-07-30T09:46:59-04:00
This is an excellent move forward, specially, for individuals like me, as an Internet marketer.
I publish high value contents from my research, studies and experience, on Internet marketing, and also provide guidance and help in locating a good "MLM Business Opportunity".
In this age of plagiarism, your trademark program will be a deterrent for people bend on publishing another person's content.
I look forward to seeing this go live.
Vat
http://www.marketing-strategies-to-succeed-online.com/mlm-business-opportunity.html
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1280486938000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
2010-07-30T06:48:58-04:00
2010-07-30T06:48:58-04:00
One problem with the new RCE practice is that if an RCE is filed after final based on an Examiner's suggestion for claim language, it can take over a year before the Examiner decides to pick up the case.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1280463716000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
chitools
2010-07-30T00:21:56-04:00
2010-07-30T00:21:56-04:00
It is just fitting that inventors who are seeking patent for their wares must come up with technical description. The written description will allow the inventor to specify the uniqueness of his/her invention. Moreover, USPTO evaluators will not have difficulty in knowing what the invention is all about. Great decision. Cheers! http://www.bestchisale.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280446622000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
www.bestchisale.com
2010-07-29T19:37:02-04:00
2010-07-29T19:37:02-04:00
I thing that mostly registration were not renewed on time continue to be considered as registered online even after their grace period expired.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280413098000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
poosawantosreview-marketing knowlegde transfer
2010-07-29T10:18:18-04:00
2010-07-29T10:18:18-04:00
With many people starting businesses in this uncertain economy, it only makes sense to streamline all of our processes including the application process for trademarks. The faster we can accomplish trademark registration the faster we can all help fuel our struggling recovery. It takes a lot of work to develop company trademarks and entering data twice is unproductive. I agree that the approach of simplifying and automating is the absolutely right idea in 2010.
http://poosawantosreview.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1280402239000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
Scott Cleere
2010-07-29T07:17:19-04:00
2010-07-29T07:17:19-04:00
If an amendment filed after a final rejection overcomes the cited prior art, but the Examiner believes additional searching is required (as they usually say), the amendment should be entered and examined without the need for filing an RCE. This could be done by removing the finality of the rejection or by doing the search prior to issuing an Advisory Action. In many of these cases, the relevant prior art should have been identified in the past searches and a review of the non-cited prior art is all that is needed. However, it is easier for the Examiner to refuse to enter the amendment, making an RCE necessary, than to do the search in the limited time for preparing an Advisory Action.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working_through_snowmageddon#comment-1280385872000
Re: Working Through Snowmageddon
Rob work at home Gordon
2010-07-29T02:44:32-04:00
2010-07-29T02:44:32-04:00
Yes. This is exactly the kind of post we need more of to encourage businesses to cut costs and create more work at home jobs. We posted a small summary of your write-up at http://todaysworkathomejobs.com, and appreciate that the government is setting a good example of how to make telework and VPN usage a business staple.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_telework_legislation#comment-1280358374000
Re: Update on Telework Legislation
PharmaPatents
2010-07-28T19:06:14-04:00
2010-07-28T19:06:14-04:00
[Trackback] The USPTO has been a leader in federal teleworking programs. The work-at-home program for trademark examiners is nearly 15 years old, and has received numerous awards. The first 500 patent examiners began teleworking in 2006, and more examiners have en...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280355979000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
mypodcarkit
2010-07-28T18:26:19-04:00
2010-07-28T18:26:19-04:00
I agree with most of the other comments, the Trademarks website needs an overhaul and terms need to be consistent and duplicate data entry eliminated when possible. http://www.mypodcarkit.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280337079000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Francisco Moriones
2010-07-28T13:11:19-04:00
2010-07-28T13:11:19-04:00
I want to make my own recommendation to PTO. I would recommend that the PTO begin working with outside software developers to create software for inputting data directly in TEAS etc from current trademark docketing systems.
Often the manual data inputting for US institutions can be very tedious and error prone. There must be a way to link TEAS with trademark docketing systems so we need not enter data twice.
http://www.creandonegocios.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_impact_of_ksr#comment-1280330017000
Re: The Impact of KSR
2010-07-28T11:13:37-04:00
2010-07-28T11:13:37-04:00
I agree with Kip Ferguson, Does the KSR ruling have an impact on the motivation? One of the issues that has been placed on the motivation factor of the TSM test is if the motivation can be implicit. http://www.FatMastering.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280297264000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Ainur
2010-07-28T02:07:44-04:00
2010-07-28T02:07:44-04:00
Agree with Augusto Perera — there must be a way to contact a particular Examiner in the TARR report of a particular application. Researching for contacts of particluar Examiner is not an easy item.
<a href=http://ainursafin.com>Ainur Safin, b2b marketer</a>
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1280255954000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Jeremy Bivins
2010-07-27T14:39:14-04:00
2010-07-27T14:39:14-04:00
The PTO that must set policy and procedure...not the bar, attorney, inventors or some collaborative community. In short, while help from others with the style and design and providing an easy submission for feedback for consideration from within the patent community can be a good idea, the overall content of MPEP should remain exclusively a function of the PTO, who guards all areas of the public interest, and not those that benefit exclusively one group or another. http://www.readymadeblinds.org
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280168266000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Social Business Pop
2010-07-26T14:17:46-04:00
2010-07-26T14:17:46-04:00
I can't think of a better implentation of something that need more change than the Trademarks website, everything is about changes, our internet changes every second and we must change with it to stay abreast of what's going on. And making a website more user friendly for it's consumers is the # 1 poragative!
Linda Baldridge - Social Business Pop - www.socialbusinesspop.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_reexamination_process#comment-1280162700000
Re: Improving the Reexamination Process
Gary McCormick, husband, step-father and remodeler in Atlanta, GA
2010-07-26T12:45:00-04:00
2010-07-26T12:45:00-04:00
Great to know something is being done to address the back-up. I've been involved in filing paperwork before with your department and realize there's lots going on behind the scenes. I'm a small business owner in Atlanta GA, www.affordablecraftsmen.net Everyone wants to complain, but there's only so much tax money to go around, so as a citizen & tax payer, thank you very much for being as efficient as possible & for putting information out there for us to feel included :-)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1280155230000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
David Boundy
2010-07-26T10:40:30-04:00
2010-07-26T10:40:30-04:00
Here are a couple things that could cut RCE's. (1) Answer all material traversed, as requred by 5 USC s 555. Always, no exceptions. Not "The Examiner respectfully disagrees" with no explanation, but a real answer that moves the case forward. (2) Implement the President's Bulletin for Agency Good Guidance Practices, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2007/m07-07.pdf If the PTO implemented these two policies, cases would continue to progress instead of bogging down. The RCE and Appeal rates at our firm would fall by 2/3 almost instantly.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/rce_filings_the_facts#comment-1280145887000
Re: RCE Filings: The Facts
Courtenay Brinckerhoff
2010-07-26T08:04:47-04:00
2010-07-26T08:04:47-04:00
Thank you for providing recent statistics on RCE filings. It would be interesting to see USPTO statistics on the average time to first action after an RCE under the new docketing procedures, as compared to the same period in FY09 and FY09 as a whole.
Would it be possible to prioritize RCEs that are filed after an interview? I discuss the particular frustrations of post-interview, post-RCE delays in a recent blog article:
http://www.pharmapatentsblog.com/new-rce-docketing-delays-examination/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280119361000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Mobile Marketing
2010-07-26T00:42:41-04:00
2010-07-26T00:42:41-04:00
Making trademark accessible through mobile devices is a great way to communicate and get updates in the now time. I look forward in sending out a few ideas f our own. mobile marketing is the next rush.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_impact_of_ksr#comment-1280099016000
Re: The Impact of KSR
Kip Ferguson
2010-07-25T19:03:36-04:00
2010-07-25T19:03:36-04:00
Does the KSR ruling have an impact on the motivation? One of the issues that has been placed on the motivation factor of the TSM test is if the motivation can be implicit.
Kip Ferguson
http://motivologymatters.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280090873000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Stephen
2010-07-25T16:47:53-04:00
2010-07-25T16:47:53-04:00
There is no doubt that our country is very quickly becoming more and more advanced with technology so why not infuse trademarks with that new trend. A lot of business in the U.S. relies heavily on the Internet, seeing that almost all businesses have a website or at least a Twitter page. Trademarks are just one more thing that I believe should be infused into the Internet, but that's just my viewpoint. Overall, I think TNG will be a great addition and I look forward to hearing about it more in the future. http://www.gadgetsforthehome.net
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280078083000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Eric
2010-07-25T13:14:43-04:00
2010-07-25T13:14:43-04:00
Perhaps the PTO need look at and take a page from the IRS playbook - the IRS was able to integrate and come up with compatible online and technology outsourcing solutions for tax issues. Why can't the PTO http://sandiegoroofersnow.com come up with similar (albeit different) technology advances?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1280059832000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
vlsi
2010-07-25T08:10:32-04:00
2010-07-25T08:10:32-04:00
I think USPTO need to upgrade its technology very urgently as the requirement or the ideas what is posted is not new actually those are age old and many other department and nearly all utility companies daily sue it .
It is very low level database maintenance requirement with web interface integration for front end uploading and status checking and back end access and status update.
you can visit contact us section of site http://www.iivdt.com for cut down version of this requirement. Any third party developer should be able to cater for this need at reasonable time frame and costs.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_telework_legislation#comment-1280054223000
Re: Update on Telework Legislation
David
2010-07-25T06:37:03-04:00
2010-07-25T06:37:03-04:00
I applaud the Office's initiative in the teleworker program. The ability to move outside the 50 mile radius could be an important factor in helping employees with family issues; e.g., spouse who wants to work in another city, family wanting to be near aging parents, etc.
The Office, however, needs to quickly update their computer infrastructure to better handle the teleworking corps. Right now the infrastructure seems to be barely limping along. The constant connection drops, the slow connections, and the quite old data access hierarchy means degraded examination performance. The more people that access this the worse it is going to get.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1279996320000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Emrby
2010-07-24T14:32:00-04:00
2010-07-24T14:32:00-04:00
Cloud computing has definitely helped ease things in many ways as far as communication and productivity tools. Your Trademark idea sounds very interesting and promising, thanks for the great article. http://internetfaxreviews.net/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1279975470000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Author of XenApp Blog
2010-07-24T08:44:30-04:00
2010-07-24T08:44:30-04:00
As you say Virtualization and cloud computing are now the standard in the industry.
The trend I do see now are the focus on self service, identity management and user provisioning.
To key to keeping the IT cost down are related to simplicity. What do the end users have to fill the same form twice? Why do they need to call help-desk to reset their password, when they with online service can get a new password on mail ?
I do believe that cooperation's have much to learn from the online providers who are striving to keep their cost down.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1279876526000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
chi flat irons
2010-07-23T05:15:26-04:00
2010-07-23T05:15:26-04:00
There must be a way to link TEAS with trademark docketing systems so we need not enter data twice.
http://www.bestchisale.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/coming_soon_draft_uspto_2010#comment-1279850287000
Re: Coming Soon: Draft USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan
Andrew Barrowman
2010-07-22T21:58:07-04:00
2010-07-22T21:58:07-04:00
Dear Mr Kappos,
It would be really helpful to inventors, and I think it would also significantly improve the quality of patent submissions, if the USPTO search engines recognised the indented structure of the US patent classification system.
For example, if I search on CCL/60/272, the current engines do not find all the patents in the indented subgroups under 60/272. Consequently, it is necessary to search each one of them individually, and there are many. Please believe me; it is a very time consuming and very frustrating process.
As the structure already exists within the classification system, surely the seach engines could be modified to recognize it. This would also add a tremendous amount of value to the classification system.
I have also noticed that some applications seem to be placed in the most obscure classes possible. I suspect this may be deliberate obfuscation on the part of certain corporations. The above modification of the engines would tend to counter such behavior, should it exist.
Please let me know if I can provide any additional information or help on the above.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_strategic_plan_now_open#comment-1279829058000
Re: USPTO Strategic Plan - Now Open for Comment
Bob Logan
2010-07-22T16:04:18-04:00
2010-07-22T16:04:18-04:00
Dear Mr. Kappos:
I read your strategic plan and I admire what you have done and intend to do about the USPTO. I am sincere about my views of your work with the USPTO and am not just stating it to get your attention.
The only thing that is missing from your admirable efforts is that as soon as an examiner approves a patent the inventor is stuck with getting the invention made and produced in China or some other foreign country.
The USA is in dire need of Jobs and all of your efforts are providing jobs for other countries, not the USA.
If an inventor was offered a grant from the Department of Commerce with a stipulation that it had to be made in the USA by USA citizens with the assistance of the Small Business Bureau,jobs in the USA would be substantially increased. Most inventors are not business people and simply sell their licence to a company who produces the invention overseas. A short example of how it would work: The inventor could hire competent staff to run the business ( the "grant") who would acquire a factory and employees who are looking for jobs. If after an agreed time (3 to 5 years) the company fails to make a profit the patent would become public and corporations could invest in the invention by paying to the government all of the monies expended to the company and retaining all of the line employees, therefore keeping the jobs going with the ability to streamline the staffing where necessary.
Hope you get to read this, I have spoken to your secretary and others including my congress person, my partners congress person, reps from the small business bureau and people in the Dept. of Commerce. Have you ever seen what grants the Dept. of Commerce approves? Nothing in there for all of the working people who are out of work.
I can be reached at 845 988 6653 if you or one of your associates would like to discuss this further.
Sincerely,
Bob Logan
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/uspto_strategic_plan_now_open#comment-1279727394000
Re: USPTO Strategic Plan - Now Open for Comment
patent litigation
2010-07-21T11:49:54-04:00
2010-07-21T11:49:54-04:00
While the stated objectives of the Strategic Plan are laudatory, the legislature's continued practice of fee diversion presents a challenge to the USPTO's admirable efforts to improve the patent law system.
http://www.generalpatent.com/media/videos/general-patent-gets-results-its-clients
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1279649848000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
John
2010-07-20T14:17:28-04:00
2010-07-20T14:17:28-04:00
Perhaps the PTO need look at and take a page from the IRS playbook - the IRS was able to integrate and come up with compatible online and technology outsourcing solutions for tax issues. Why can't the PTO http://sink-hole.com come up with similar (albeit different) technology advances?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_three_track_proposal_putting#comment-1279644917000
Re: The Three-Track Proposal: Putting Applicants in Control of Examination Timing
Nickolaus Leggett
2010-07-20T12:55:17-04:00
2010-07-20T12:55:17-04:00
Is there a conflict between the first-to-file concept and the proposed three-track patent application system? For example, how do you detect conflicting applications that are not yet processed (hidden) in Track 2 or Track 3 queues while you are doing a Track 1 search? Can you have a situation where applications are granted under Track 1 for inventions that are already covered in applications that have not yet been processed in Track 2 or Track 3?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/update_on_telework_legislation#comment-1279643857000
Re: Update on Telework Legislation
Cherie Woodward
2010-07-20T12:37:37-04:00
2010-07-20T12:37:37-04:00
Many thanks to you and others on the USPTO team for working with Congress to facilitate this legislation and move it forward. Your efforts are greatly appreciated, especially by those of us who will be directly impacted by the changes.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ten_tips_for_streamlining_patent#comment-1279640071000
Re: Ten Tips for Streamlining Patent Prosecution
Katherine Donnel
2010-07-20T11:34:31-04:00
2010-07-20T11:34:31-04:00
Thank you for an interesting blog. I am a patent/tradeamrk secretary with 19+ years of intellectual property experience and looking for a job at the USPTO. I would sure appreciate someone contacting me at kathy.donnel@yahoo.com. Thank you very much.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ten_tips_for_streamlining_patent#comment-1279576863000
Re: Ten Tips for Streamlining Patent Prosecution
PharmaPatents
2010-07-19T18:01:03-04:00
2010-07-19T18:01:03-04:00
[Trackback] Checking the status of a U.S. patent application after you&rsquo;ve filed a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) can be confusing and disheartening. Even if you&rsquo;ve filed several responses and conducted an examiner interview, the USPTO&rsquo;s ...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1279541219000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
nilou plasma
2010-07-19T08:06:59-04:00
2010-07-19T08:06:59-04:00
Very good new all around, It is in my opinion about refining the process into it's simplest format. I commend your commerce minded approach, it is so easy to add to layer cake. The comments on http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark are meaningful in this area and await your comment ?
http://www.likarte.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/coming_soon_draft_uspto_2010#comment-1279486388000
Re: Coming Soon: Draft USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan
MARIZA ROUHANA
2010-07-18T16:53:08-04:00
2010-07-18T16:53:08-04:00
why is hard to make patent of my idea?
To many obtacle to patent an idea
To patent an idea like impossible
to many requirement to patent my good idea. I don't know who to turn too.
You don't know anybody to help you or guide you to patent your idea
the lawyer or attorney are to expensive for a patent
if you don't have money, you cannot hire one.
this just for individual inventor
I hope it would be easy to patent for an idea for individual inventors. I believe my idea is very useful for everbody.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/coming_soon_draft_uspto_2010#comment-1278586814000
Re: Coming Soon: Draft USPTO 2010-2015 Strategic Plan
Amit Agrawal
2010-07-08T07:00:14-04:00
2010-07-08T07:00:14-04:00
I hope this strategic plan will really work out to speed up timely examination of patent applications ultimately leading to the public and the corporate satisfaction who keep on waiting for a long time for a response towards their filed patent applications. I do hope the draft plan will be implemented as soon as possible....
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_three_track_proposal_putting#comment-1278522057000
Re: The Three-Track Proposal: Putting Applicants in Control of Examination Timing
Inventor0875
2010-07-07T13:00:57-04:00
2010-07-07T13:00:57-04:00
Enhancing Fast Examination with Applicant option to Schedule Patent Issue.
Scenario: Innovation in need of Funding.
The Patent Office would provide a fast “notice of allowance” but with an Applicant option to schedule patent issue (public disclosure) for up to at least 18 months (from filing).
For example, an Applicant receives a “notice of allowance” in 3 months on a nice set of broad and backup claims. Applicant could then “sell” investors by having known claims (value & lower risk) along with 15 months of stealth/first-mover advantage (lower risks and greater potential reward). This combination would help start-ups to obtain/increase funding and succeed in bringing the innovation to market as first-mover.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/five_tips_for_practitioners#comment-1277487313000
Re: Five Tips For Practitioners
Franco Serafini
2010-06-25T13:35:13-04:00
2010-06-25T13:35:13-04:00
It may also help if the examiners were better trained in the legal requirements for obviousness. To make just one example, KSR requires a person skilled in the art to have a reason to combine references, not that a claim be found obvious only because the claim elements can be individually found in the prior art among a myriad of competing elements - no matter how improbable the proposed combination may be and that no reason can be discerned to pick one element over another. Yet, some examiners doe not seem to appreciate this or many other aspects of patent law and interviews do not seem to help a lot when an examiner's mind is set.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_reexamination_process#comment-1277376747000
Re: Improving the Reexamination Process
Victor Wasylyna
2010-06-24T06:52:27-04:00
2010-06-24T06:52:27-04:00
Another aspect of the reexamination process that deserves your attention is the request for continued reexamination (“RCR”). RCR was proposed in a notice published in the March 1, 2005 issue of the Official Gazette. The notice acknowledges that to the extent MPEP § 2240 has been amended to require a substantial new question of patentability as a prerequisite to granting a second request for reexamination, “a patent owner will now be prevented from obtaining entry of an amendment and/or evidence not entered after final rejection … by filing another request for reexamination based on the same substantial question of patentability.” Therefore, “the Office plans to propose a revision to the patent rules to provide for the filing of [an RCR] which would be similar to [RCE] practice.” To date, no such rules for filing an RCR have been promulgated, leaving patent owners subject to the vagaries of the petition process when seeking to enter evidence and amendments after final.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_three_track_proposal_putting#comment-1277218256000
Re: The Three-Track Proposal: Putting Applicants in Control of Examination Timing
Nickolaus Leggett
2010-06-22T10:50:56-04:00
2010-06-22T10:50:56-04:00
The establishment of the Track 1 prioritized applications has serious philosophical and ethical ramifications.
The USPTO is a governmental agency that should be representing the interests of all American citizens. The USPTO does not exist to serve just the interests of the wealthy organizations that can easily afford Track 1. The USPTO is not a private organization such as an airline that can have First Class and Coach.
Since it is clear that Track 1 helps rich organizations far more than other applicants, the establishment of Track 1 applications goes against the basic American value of equality of opportunity. Our sense of equality requires that the USPTO operate a more even-handed patent application system. It is ethically wrong to suppress the independent inventors, while at the same time facilitating the advantages of the privileged applicants.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1277189783000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
Joseph Reeves
2010-06-22T02:56:23-04:00
2010-06-22T02:56:23-04:00
I commend the Federal Circuit for coming with the decision that written descriptions shall be included. It is just fitting that inventors who are seeking patent for their wares must come up with technical description. The written description will allow the inventor to specify the uniqueness of his/her invention. Moreover, USPTO evaluators will not have difficulty in knowing what the invention is all about. Great decision. Cheers!
http://www.foodbin-herbroom.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1277140319000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Joe@Intraday Trading
2010-06-21T13:11:59-04:00
2010-06-21T13:11:59-04:00
How wish that getting a trademark is as easy as creating your domain name. This is not far fetched as technology is advancing fast and before we knew it things could happen at a click of a button, wink of an eye, or even through thoughts.
http://www.foodbin-herbroom.com/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/five_tips_for_practitioners#comment-1276950295000
Re: Five Tips For Practitioners
Paul F. Morgan
2010-06-19T08:24:55-04:00
2010-06-19T08:24:55-04:00
Since applications filed as bad English translations are clearly a problem for everyone, why not encourage examiners to reject them and require them to be refiled in better English (along with a redline copy showning all changes to insure no new matter)? 35 USC 112 requires a specification in "full, clear, concise and exact terms." Such rejections should also quickly discourage such practices.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1276923468000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
speed reading
2010-06-19T00:57:48-04:00
2010-06-19T00:57:48-04:00
Thanks for giving this informative and useful article which relate to the jobs and the entire team,it USPTO team is every bit as smart, intense, thoughtful, passionate, and hard-working ,Thanks.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1276787637000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
Edward Augustine
2010-06-17T11:13:57-04:00
2010-06-17T11:13:57-04:00
Director Kappos, You acknowledge the explosive growth in reexaminations, but has the USPTO given sufficient consideration to why that is so? IMO, it is an inexpensive way for infringers to tie up court proceedings. Infringers know that almost any request for reexam will be granted, placing a burden on the patent owner. The cost to the infringer is peanuts, but given the length of time reexams can take, the infringer can put off finality of litigation for several years. That puts any small entity patent owner at a financial disadvantage by essentially bringing licensing to a hault. This creates undue pressure on the patent owner to settle litigation for much less, but does nothing to exedite the reexamination process. The present reexamination system is working on behalf of all the patent infringers and against the patent owners. I doubt this is what was envisioned when the Patent Office was formed. The reexamination process needs to be made fair, and the life of the patent extended for the period of time it is being reexamined.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1276687288000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Erik Pelton
2010-06-16T07:21:28-04:00
2010-06-16T07:21:28-04:00
A few ideas for additions to the trademark systems as part of “Trademarks Next Generation”:
• Add a TTAB proceeding link to TARR
• Format all USPTO trademark pages for mobile browsers
• show upcoming USPTO deadlines for Applicant responses in TARR
• Allow users to save frequently used TESS searches
• Allow for longer TESS search sessions when necessary
• In TESS search results, provide a link to send the search results to another party
• Make USPTO Office Action PDFs searchable
• Make USPTO Office Action Response PDFs searchable
• Publish TESS search system “application programming interface” (API) to encourage new ways and uses for searching the trademark registry
- Erik Pelton - Erik M. Pelton & Associates, PLLC -
www.erikpelton.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_three_track_proposal_putting#comment-1276638856000
Re: The Three-Track Proposal: Putting Applicants in Control of Examination Timing
Gena777
2010-06-15T17:54:16-04:00
2010-06-15T17:54:16-04:00
The 3-track system indicates your understanding that different patent applications should be treated differently; implementing this concept could contribute to increased efficiency at the USPTO. Though we can't yet know whether fast/ordinary/delayed is the ideal system for categorizing patent applications, it's a step in the right direction. I believe that the USPTO needs to start reviewing several different types of multi-tiered approaches to patent examination, because the traditional one-size-fits-all approach doesn't meet the needs of today's environment. Until we can get real patent reform, however, such incremental steps will have to suffice.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/25/patent-reform-misses-the-mark/
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/five_tips_for_practitioners#comment-1276603994000
Re: Five Tips For Practitioners
David Boundy
2010-06-15T08:13:14-04:00
2010-06-15T08:13:14-04:00
I've tried several times to submit thoughtful and complete comments in response to Director's blog articles, but the system kicks out any comments over some very small limit - 1000 characters or something like that.
If the PTO intends this to be a genuine give-and-take of thoughtful discourse, the PTO should remove the limit, and let comments go through with formatting so they can be read - paragraphs, etc.
The stated reason - to block spam - is transparently false. Look at comment 2 to the Ombudsman article. (The totality of the facts prompts one to ask, does the PTO intend this blog as genuine dialog, or is this yet another solicitation of comments that the PTO has no intention of reading?)
David Boundy
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1276052977000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Larry Formey
2010-06-08T23:09:37-04:00
2010-06-08T23:09:37-04:00
As far as inputting manually i understand most government agency's have scanning technology. Google is scanning books at lightening speed why can't any simple form be submitted and reprocessed with OCR technology?
<a href="http://www.garagedoorrepair-oakland.com/locations.kml">Garage Door Repair</a>
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_reexamination_process#comment-1275920038000
Re: Improving the Reexamination Process
Guy DiMambro
2010-06-07T10:13:58-04:00
2010-06-07T10:13:58-04:00
Yes, I have a comment. I 'm a patent draftsman. I have notice for years that the standards set forth, have been slipping greatly. I take pride and great detail to make sure the drawings are adherd to. I have talked with partners and associates and they more than agree.
Some have been, SHOCKED, at what has been accepted. I have seen for my self and words can not descibe the distaste, I felt. I have to ask, why do you even have a graphic art catagory? I could do there job much better. I would not accept there is a back log, or
any other answer. You are the UNITED STATES PATENT office where is the PRIDE.
Thanks
Guy
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/five_tips_for_practitioners#comment-1275919676000
Re: Five Tips For Practitioners
David Boundy
2010-06-07T10:07:56-04:00
2010-06-07T10:07:56-04:00
My three requests from examiners --
1. Examine the claims. Consider every word. In many art units, examiners snip the claims apart into phrases, and match up the phrases to a reference, but ignore the interconnections. In computers and business methods (my two areas), almost all components are old, its the interconnections that are new, and if the examiner ignores those, the whole prosecution bogs down.
2. Answer ALL material traversed. There is no such thing as a "non-issue item" -- if the applicant raised it, it was raised for a reason, and by law, the examiner has to address the issue. Over 80% of my extended-prosecution cases fall into this pattern: in reply to a first Action, I raise at least one issue that should result in allowance (usually an omitted claim limitation -- see item 1!), and the examiner's second action simply ignores the issue. (I think the underlying cause here is final rejection -- the examiner knows that if he/she addresses the issue I raised, then the second action can't be final -- therefore there's an incentive to selectively ignore!)
3. We all have to be able to rely on the words on the printed page to know the law -- when you need to know the law, look it up, don't make it up. A few examples: (a) 37 CFR 1.104(d)(2) says that after an applicant "calls for" an affidavit or substantial evidence, the examiner must come forward with something more than personal opinion in reply. End of story, according to the text -- now try getting an examiner to follow this in practice. (b) Presidential directive, Supreme Court, and Foreword to the MPEP all note that the MPEP gives instructions that examiners are "required" to follow, but is not "law" against applicants. Ask an examiner to follow the MPEP - again, a near-certain way to create friction, not progress. (c) Once Congress, the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit have given us definitions of terms like "moot," "new ground of rejection," "procedural," "appealable," obligations under Paperwork Reduction Act, and the like, that controls. Too often, a lawyer that reads the relevant law and asks an examiner or the Petitions Office to simply follow it creates friction, not resolution. PTO employees are very fond of phrases like "it cannot be seen" to explain why the written law will not be followed.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_reexamination_process#comment-1275855289000
Re: Improving the Reexamination Process
Scott McKeown
2010-06-06T16:14:49-04:00
2010-06-06T16:14:49-04:00
The effectiveness of patent reexamination is dictated by the quality of evidence and arguments presented to the Office. Currently, close to 40% of requests are returned as non-compliant, as such, the best practice document is a great resource for practitioners unfamiliar with patent reexamination.
The effectiveness of the CRU is demonstrated by the popularity of patent reexamination. Of course, there are still refinements to be made that would help improve the quality of patent reexamination. For example, and I have written about this issue extensively, (patentspostgrant.com) the reexamination of means-plus-function claims is hampered by inconsistencies in the statutory scheme. As held by In re Donaldson, a means-plus-function claim cannot be examined without first identifying the underlying structure in the specification (MPEP 2183) for the purpose of determining the existence of an equivalent strcture in the art. Yet, requests for reexamination are accepted that do not identify such structure, but instead rely on the BRI standard to interpret MPF Claims. This leads to a waste of Office resources as demonstrated in last week's BPAI opinion (ex parte Anascape 2010-006119, applying BRI to MPF claims is reversible error). In other words, had the claimed structure been required of the request before finding the SNQ (which should have been the case), the issue would have been before the examiner, and the BPAI would not have had to effectively remand the case.
This is not the fault of the CRU, but the fault of the statutory scheme of reexamination. Simply stated, original claims cannot be rejected in reexamination based on 112 support issues. Yet, at the same time, MPF claims cannot be examined without considering support. So, in cases where support may be lacking, the CRU is forced to turn a blind eye; this is a diservice to the public. Perhaps it is for this reason that examiners routinley fall back on the BRI standard.
While the enforcement of In re Donaldson may lead to an increase in non-compliance or denied SNQs, training the public in the proper form of a request as it relates to MPF claims makes more sense than proceeding on a reversible claim construction. Where the support is deemed insufficient in the process of examining a MPF claim, the Office needs to be able to identify that deficiency.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/improving_the_reexamination_process#comment-1275838141000
Re: Improving the Reexamination Process
Kyle Jensen
2010-06-06T11:29:01-04:00
2010-06-06T11:29:01-04:00
Excellent step in right direction!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/five_tips_for_practitioners#comment-1275481325000
Re: Five Tips For Practitioners
Jennifer Bales
2010-06-02T08:22:05-04:00
2010-06-02T08:22:05-04:00
Would you like to hear my five tips for Examiners? :-)
Actually, they are largely parallel: review the application to understand the invention, do a good first search and write a good office action, etc.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/five_tips_for_practitioners#comment-1275423024000
Re: Five Tips For Practitioners
James K. Poole
2010-06-01T16:10:24-04:00
2010-06-01T16:10:24-04:00
It's interesting to see the recommendation that all possible arguments be included, since many commentators on patent prosecution and appellate practice recommend presenting the best arguments and culling those which are marginal. Many patent attorneys do include all possible arguments on each point, not being sure which will impress the examiner and/or board, but there is a risk that an examiner may not read al the contents of a lengthy amendment or brief fully or carefully. If all arguments are presented, one can at least emphasize the most important in an interview.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_new_ombudsman_pilot_program#comment-1274869213000
Re: The New Ombudsman Pilot Program
David Gange
2010-05-26T06:20:13-04:00
2010-05-26T06:20:13-04:00
Could you add an RSS feed to the Wall page of the Facebook listing?
At PIUG (Patent Information Users Group) we are trying to help our members stay current by providing RSS feeds. The Facebook RSS/Blog page has such a feed, along with a button to simplify installing the feed. Could someone kindly install a similar feed on the Wall page.
Thanks,
David Gange
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1274731292000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
robert logan
2010-05-24T16:01:32-04:00
2010-05-24T16:01:32-04:00
director kappos to get to the simple point your fine efforts and hard work in expediting patents for individuals and small businesses will not improve the conditions or economy of the usa. all of these wonderful new inventions who have acquired patents will be made in china or some other place but unfortunately not in the usa .there will be no increase in jobs no opening of the abandonded factories no made in the usa .what are you going to say on thursday that will give the citizens of the usa hope for the future? right now it does not look too good we're going downhill. bob logan someone who believes in mr david kappos
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep_part_2#comment-1274701178000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP: Part 2
Adam Cermak
2010-05-24T07:39:38-04:00
2010-05-24T07:39:38-04:00
Improving the MPEP is a fine idea, really, but I think there is a threshold concern that should overshadow revision of the tome: improving application of the policies and procedures that the MPEP details. What happened to the corps' work being wonkish, neutral, and fair? If the average examiner doesn't have the experience and/or training to correctly and consistently apply the current MPEP, is it really fair to predict that adding examples and explanations to it will produce better outcomes? Or will the new-and-improved MPEP be applied in the same way the current edition is? Based on current experience and the PTO's hiring plans, perhaps you should strongly consider that revision of the MPEP is the carriage, and remediation of the corps' application of it, the horse.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_new_ombudsman_pilot_program#comment-1274446532000
Re: The New Ombudsman Pilot Program
Jennifer Bales
2010-05-21T08:55:32-04:00
2010-05-21T08:55:32-04:00
I can already provide an anecdotal positive report of this program. I asked an ombudsman to help me get an Examiner to grant an interview, and he was successful in doing so. We will see how the program works out over time, but so far I am encouraged.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/the_new_ombudsman_pilot_program#comment-1274127184000
Re: The New Ombudsman Pilot Program
Brad Heisler
2010-05-17T16:13:04-04:00
2010-05-17T16:13:04-04:00
I am impressed with the many changes that are taking place at the PTO, including this new Ombudsman program. I suspect it will be useful when needed, but if it proves to be of little use, you can always end it or improve upon it. I appreciated meeting with Director Barner and Commissioner Stoll in San Francisco last Friday. They are doing a very good job of "listening to the stakeholders" and communicating all of the improvements at the PTO including this new program.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1273625747000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
tv series
2010-05-11T20:55:47-04:00
2010-05-11T20:55:47-04:00
we recommend that the PTO begin working with outside software developers to create software for inputting data directly in TEAS etc from current trademark docketing systems. We are effectively doing the manual data inputting for the PTO which is very tedious and error prone.
http://wikitvs.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1273573470000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
MaxDrei
2010-05-11T06:24:30-04:00
2010-05-11T06:24:30-04:00
I had thought that the main use of a WD objection was to stop new matter getting into the app during prosecution. I see that this is the issue that bothers the first contributor to this thread. Yet the originating text from Director Kappos makes no mention of that function.
But perhaps these two uses can be unified. Prosecution amendments are often what in Europe would be labelled as "undisclosed intermediate limitations" on the scope of the claim originally filed. That fits nicely with the debate here, and on the Dennis Crouch blog, about genus claims vs species claims.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1273402488000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
danne
2010-05-09T06:54:48-04:00
2010-05-09T06:54:48-04:00
I filed a design patent application and left off the functional requirements, a written description of my invention. The application was rejected. The patent examiner stated in the rejection of the claim "The specification shall contain a written description of the invention....". I don't have a problem with that requirement.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1273140579000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
Nickolaus Leggett
2010-05-06T06:09:39-04:00
2010-05-06T06:09:39-04:00
I am an inventor and I think that the written description is essential. The written description allows the inventor to clearly explain how his or her invention actually works. The description presents the physical theory of operation and the sequence of actions used in the operation of the invention. The written description also provides the alternative versions of the invention. We need to remember the explanatory power of written text and how it is more effective than just claims and figures alone.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/written_description_little_used_perhaps#comment-1273080322000
Re: Written Description--Little Used Perhaps, But Extremely Useful to Ensure Claims are Appropriately Scoped
Anon
2010-05-05T13:25:22-04:00
2010-05-05T13:25:22-04:00
The written description, to my mind, is about the inventor knowing what they've invented (older cases refer to having possession), but I think of it as identifying what unites the invention. The problem is, to my mind, that the genus species situation discussed above doesn't reach the distinction. There are two ways to cover ground in a genus, one is providing examples, the other is saying what your examples have in common. Both are examples of enablement.
The distinction comes up most clearly, to me, with negative claim limitations. Say you invent a chair (four legs, a rectangular seat, a rectangular back, and two armrests). Later, I come up with a stool (three legs and a round seat). If I want to make an amendment after I originally filed, I can claim having exactly three legs, or having a round seat. I cannot claim having less than four legs because that concept didn't occur to me when I filed, nor can I claim something like not having a back.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/accelerating_green_innovation#comment-1272946011000
Re: Accelerating Green Innovation
Louis Rosavio
2010-05-04T00:06:51-04:00
2010-05-04T00:06:51-04:00
As long as all applications are treated equally...
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1272179711000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
tatli tarifleri
2010-04-25T03:15:11-04:00
2010-04-25T03:15:11-04:00
Virtualization and cloud computing are now industry standard in information technology solutions, and we want to take advantage of this technology in our aim to provide full end-to-end www.kupseker.net electronic processing for Trademarks. Harnessing this technology necessitates a redesign of our present system, giving us the opportunity to further functionality,
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/celebrating_america_s_greatest_inventors#comment-1272129724000
Re: Celebrating America's Greatest Inventors
Ron D. Katznelson
2010-04-24T13:22:04-04:00
2010-04-24T13:22:04-04:00
Director Kappos,
Thank you for viewing USPTO’s work from all directions, including inventors’ perspectives. You say that visiting the Inventors Hall of Fame spurred your “renewed commitment to the cause of reforming and transforming the USPTO.” We commend you for that. Those of us who follow details of the thoughtful recent administrative steps to improve examination taken under your direction can see first positive signs of this commitment by you and your team. I am particularly impressed by your attention to detail and your personal effort to fully understand the examination process from the examiner’s perspective. You had mentioned in recent remarks at the William Mitchell College that you have personally examined a sample application to experience first-hand the USPTO process. This positive approach could not have been taken by your recent predecessors. Thank you for embarking on this important voyage of reforming the USPTO and for your public service.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working_through_snowmageddon#comment-1271907595000
Re: Working Through Snowmageddon
Joliese Tan
2010-04-21T23:39:55-04:00
2010-04-21T23:39:55-04:00
This is where we see the benefits of an adaptive workforce, and teleworking, really shine.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1271905186000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Cho Yung Tea
2010-04-21T22:59:46-04:00
2010-04-21T22:59:46-04:00
We are effectively doing the manual data inputting for the PTO which is very tedious and error prone. There must be a way to link TEAS with trademark docketing systems so we need not enter data twice.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1271827677000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Fiona Smithe
2010-04-21T01:27:57-04:00
2010-04-21T01:27:57-04:00
I think there should be atleast on change to include a way to contact a particular Examiner in the TARR report of a particular application. Before there was a field for "Attorney Assigned" with a name and phone number. Now it is only the name.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1271824010000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Tulip Kiya
2010-04-21T00:26:50-04:00
2010-04-21T00:26:50-04:00
Ideas are almost simple to appear by, but inventions are added difficult. It takes knowledge, time, money, and accomplishment to clarify an abstraction into a applicable invention, even on paper.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1271822787000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Kacey Jone
2010-04-21T00:06:27-04:00
2010-04-21T00:06:27-04:00
I thing that mostly registration were not renewed on time continue to be considered as registered online even after their grace period expired.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/celebrating_america_s_greatest_inventors#comment-1271762965000
Re: Celebrating America's Greatest Inventors
Nickolaus Leggett
2010-04-20T07:29:25-04:00
2010-04-20T07:29:25-04:00
The USPTO should team up with the Smithsonian's Museum of American History (Lemelson Center) to present a course on how to invent. Inventing is a teachable skill that is very valuable for the American economy. You could start with the simple technique of the morphological table that generates possible invention ideas. (I wrote an article on this technique titled, "The Morphological Table - An Invention Generator" that was published in QEX magazine, December 1987 - ARRL Newington Ct.) Then the course can go onward to look at invention as a process of analyzing functional alternatives. To invent from a functional alternative basis, you look first at the service or function that you want to achieve and then start developing feasible alternatives to what is being done in the current state of the art. It would help America's economy and the World if we started teaching the process of invention and getting more Americans to produce new inventions.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/streamlining_the_appeals_process_and#comment-1270740616000
Re: Streamlining the Appeals Process and Reducing Appeal Pendency
Scott Servilla
2010-04-08T11:30:16-04:00
2010-04-08T11:30:16-04:00
While not directly related to appeal pendency, but results in delay of appeal is the repeated practice by an Examiner of responding to the submission of an Appeal Brief with a non-final office action in a single application. Can there be a mechanism or a rule put in place to limit an Examiner's ability to essentially short-circuit the appeal by issuing a non-final office action? Some ideas: 1. No count given for a non-final office action issued after an Appeal Brief is filed. 2. Allow for a conference similar to the Pre-Appeal Brief Conference prior to an Examiner responding to an Appeal Brief with a non-final Office action. 3. Make a rule to allow the practice of issuing a non-final Office Action after the Appeal Brief to be limited to once per single application.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1270379506000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
nfg
2010-04-04T07:11:46-04:00
2010-04-04T07:11:46-04:00
I recommend that the PTO begin working with outside software developers to create software for inputting data directly in TEAS etc from current trademark docketing systems. We are effectively doing the manual data inputting for the PTO which is very tedious and error prone. There must be a way to link TEAS with trademark docketing systems so we need not enter data twice. http://needforgame.net
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1270379307000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
nfg
2010-04-04T07:08:27-04:00
2010-04-04T07:08:27-04:00
Great suggestion, David. It would be nice to see a non-authoritative wiki "working draft" of the MPEP to which many more people could contribute. This would reduce workload on USPTO staff and permit more frequent and timely MPEP updates (e.g. the MPEP could see a USPTO-vetted and electronically published update within a few weeks after a major case ruling rather than half a year or more). However, the wiki would suffer many of the same problems as other wikis (edit wars, imbalance, poor sourcing, misinformation, vandalism, content bloat, opinion/POV) and dealing with these issues would require sensitive and judicious administration. (continued...) http://needforgame.net
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advancing_uspto_s_work_sharing#comment-1270310502000
Re: Advancing USPTO's Work Sharing Efforts
Neil Farbstein
2010-04-03T12:01:42-04:00
2010-04-03T12:01:42-04:00
I am a professional inventor with three patents pending at the USPTO. I recently saw some possible changes to patent law listed on your website. I think its a great idea to help small independent inventors get he representation from Pro Bono Patent lawyers. I applaud that policy change.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1270310330000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
dizi izle
2010-04-03T11:58:50-04:00
2010-04-03T11:58:50-04:00
Ideas are relatively easy to come by, but inventions are more difficult. It takes knowledge, time, money, and effort to refine an idea into a workable invention, even on paper. Turning an invention into an innovation - a new product accepted by the marketplace - takes a lot of effort and a little luck. There are substantial barriers in the path of those who pursue innovation. Overcoming them requires careful planning and plenty of input from others.
<a href="http://www.secveizle.com">dizi izle</a>
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1270223989000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Robert L Scott
2010-04-02T11:59:49-04:00
2010-04-02T11:59:49-04:00
Since the MPEP is an outgrowth of the Patent Laws and Rules and the Agency's administration thereof, the MPEP is not the kind of document that should be exposed to arbitrary change by the "collaborative community" - it is not a "wiki." Any changes or updates to the MPEP should be conservatively approached and carefully considered. The MPEP must reflect the current state of the law both in accurately reflecting the latest statutory and rules language and in accurately reflecting the current state of agency interpretation of those laws and rules from an examination standpoint. The MPEP should be changed only when PTO operation has been stabilized to the point where the MPEP can serve its intended purpose to accurately show the procedure by which examination is being conducted.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/revising_the_examiner_pap#comment-1270136293000
Re: Revising the Examiner PAP
Samuel Sims
2010-04-01T11:38:13-04:00
2010-04-01T11:38:13-04:00
I have really had a difficult time to say the least with two applications being made for patents. I understand that there is a grading system also there is a learning curve for anyone seeking a patent!
However, what I fail to understand is that the "proper" procedures from start-to-finish if you will have absolutely no use or true bearing on the outcome of an application or the actual patent. It is this point system and grading of the examiners that seems to take precedent to the actual patents. Is this the case or not?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/streamlining_the_appeals_process_and#comment-1270118973000
Re: Streamlining the Appeals Process and Reducing Appeal Pendency
Wendy Koba
2010-04-01T06:49:33-04:00
2010-04-01T06:49:33-04:00
One change I'd like to see in the "Summary of Claimed Subject Matter" is to define the reference to the specification by paragraph number instead of 'page and line number'. I haven't included "line numbers" on my specifications in years, but when filing an Appeal Brief, I need to go back and count the line numbers to fulfill this requirement. Would an Appeal Brief be bounced as non-compliant if it referred to the specification by paragraph number, and not "page and line number"?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1269847529000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Jonathan
2010-03-29T03:25:29-04:00
2010-03-29T03:25:29-04:00
Very good new all around, It is in my opinion about refining the process into it's simplest format. I commend your commerce minded approach, it is so easy to add to layer cake.
The comments on
http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark
are meaningful in this area and await your comment ?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark#comment-1269767027000
Re: Madrid Protocol: Challenges Facing Trademark Filers
Nick Betts
2010-03-28T05:03:47-04:00
2010-03-28T05:03:47-04:00
Hello, I am also interested to reading the reply to the above comments. I picked the thread up on Google and with the this dating back to; Tuesday Dec 15, 2009. Will David reply ? I think the comment re: Posted by Graham on March 12, 2010 is quite incisive and relevant to today.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1269527534000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Augusto Perera
2010-03-25T10:32:14-04:00
2010-03-25T10:32:14-04:00
1. Create, like with patents, an online system where registered Trademark Attorneys can see their portfolio of cases (registered or pending trademarks) being handled by the USPTO.
2. Expedite the cancellation of registrations that went beyond the regular period for renewals under Sections 8 or 9. Often happens that registrations that were not renewed on time continue to be considered as registered online even after their grace period expired.
3. Include a way to contact a particular Examiner in the TARR report of a particular application. Before there was a field for "Attorney Assigned" with a name and phone number. Now it is only the name.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1269526591000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
Augusto Perera
2010-03-25T10:16:31-04:00
2010-03-25T10:16:31-04:00
Match the description of the identification of goods/services available to the public at http://tess2.uspto.gov/netahtml/tidm.html with the one available with TEAS.
For example, when looking for a description of a service provided by one of our clients with TESS we found a particular description that matches the good/services of a client. However, when weeks later we start preparing the application inside TEAS that same description is not available as provided with TESS.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1269419996000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
John B. Farmer
2010-03-24T04:39:56-04:00
2010-03-24T04:39:56-04:00
David -- Thank you for launching TNG. This is a wonderful development for the trademark community.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/trademarks_next_generation#comment-1269353487000
Re: Trademarks Next Generation
MICHAEL MACDERMOTT
2010-03-23T10:11:27-04:00
2010-03-23T10:11:27-04:00
I recommend that the PTO begin working with outside software developers to create software for inputting data directly in TEAS etc from current trademark docketing systems. We are effectively doing the manual data inputting for the PTO which is very tedious and error prone. There must be a way to link TEAS with trademark docketing systems so we need not enter data twice.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1269273732000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
DP
2010-03-22T12:02:12-04:00
2010-03-22T12:02:12-04:00
The question is how to let the examiners and applicants quickly find the right information.
In addition to the hyperlinks, concordances, etc, I wish a comment section could be added to every page of the MPEP. The comment section could be further divided into official subsection and non-official subsection.
The official sub-section is for the purpose of providing clear guidelines/comments by PTO (This will show the Office has the ability to apply the rules and regulations, and not to confuse the readers). This could be in an interactive format ( e.g. Q&A in real or non-real time)
I would also like to see a "What to do if…" section be added to MPEP. This would be like a more improved version of the Index section at the end of the existing MPEP integrated with the situations similar to the questions of the patent agent or certificate examination.
I believe we are the generation that leads innovations and creates patent history.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/revising_the_examiner_pap#comment-1269008181000
Re: Revising the Examiner PAP
Jennifer Bales
2010-03-19T10:16:21-04:00
2010-03-19T10:16:21-04:00
Mr. Kappos, as a patent attorney I'd like to say how impressed I am with your initiatives and ideas so far. Thank you.
Regarding Examiner performance, what I would like to see most is better first office actions. It is difficult to put together meaningful affidavits or hold useful interviews when the first office action doesn't have very much to do with the invention. So too many cases that shouldn't require a continuation do. Perhaps more time for a first action or more counts alloted would have good results. My clients would be happy to pay a larger filing fee and to wait longer in order to get good first office actions.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark#comment-1268929795000
Re: Madrid Protocol: Challenges Facing Trademark Filers
Christine Adene
2010-03-18T12:29:55-04:00
2010-03-18T12:29:55-04:00
I would interested in the Director's Response to
Posted by Graham on March 12, 2010 at 01:15 PM EST #
As I believe the USPTO must answer this type of anomaly before moving on to questioning other outside commercial aspects. The USPTO has a duty of care and dam built by individual responsibility within an institution is not acceptable in today's information highway, The appeal decision costs will be challenged time and again in the future .
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ex_parte_frye_bpai_s#comment-1268834342000
Re: Ex Parte Frye: BPAIβs Standard of Review of Examinersβ Rejections
Lee
2010-03-17T09:59:02-04:00
2010-03-17T09:59:02-04:00
Great point Mr. Rogitz.
Similarly, what is the point of filing a pre-appeal brief for request when more often than not, the only people who are in the conference are the Examiner and his/her SPE. I thought the purpose of a request was to get another pair of PTO eyes on the case. We are considering dropping these to save money for clients since more often than not nothing of substance results from these requests.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark#comment-1268741701000
Re: Madrid Protocol: Challenges Facing Trademark Filers
Tony Venturino
2010-03-16T08:15:01-04:00
2010-03-16T08:15:01-04:00
Where can I get USPTO statistics on the number of inbound Madrid applications from foreign applicants applying to extend protection into the US; the number of Madrid international applications filed by US applicants; and the number of outbound Madrid applications filed by US applicants for extension of protection outside the US?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1268645967000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Retired Patent Attorney
2010-03-15T05:39:27-04:00
2010-03-15T05:39:27-04:00
Director Kappos. Regarding backlog, has PTO considered:
1. Establishing quasi-governmental institutions to provide examination functions.
2. Extending offers to qualified (experienced!!) US patent attorneys able to work from anywhere in the world.
3. Partnering with small boutique patent firms to assist with examination functions, in exchange for agreeing to not represent clients before the PTO.
4. Opening offices in more desirable cities, or even overseas, to attract experienced (potentially retired) US patent attorneys.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/advancing_uspto_s_work_sharing#comment-1268619534000
Re: Advancing USPTO's Work Sharing Efforts
inventor-0875
2010-03-14T22:18:54-04:00
2010-03-14T22:18:54-04:00
Director Kappos,
Automated sharing of work results between patent offices by itself is a good idea.
But the PPH and SHARE programs also allow an entity to get faster service in the U.S. (jump to the front of the U.S. queue) by doing foreign filings.
Both of these programs seem to unfairly favor large entities, at the expense of small entities who initially don't have the resources to foreign file.
What is the justification for allowing an [more often a large] entity to jump to the front of the U.S. queue, just because they have also filed in foreign countries?
Thank you for considering my viewpoint.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark#comment-1268399759000
Re: Madrid Protocol: Challenges Facing Trademark Filers
Graham
2010-03-12T08:15:59-05:00
2010-03-12T08:15:59-05:00
Ref: Posted by Jonathan on March 04, 2010 at 08:01 AM EST
I agree.
Case law cannot be denied in 2010 when technological communications have ensured all the facts are clear and available to examining attorneys.
Precedents set by past cases are the very foundation stone of the law and used as references relevant to trade mark law as laid down in Acts of Congress and previously decided court cases.
It would have been historically acceptable for the attorneys decision to be correct without recourse to a tribunal on the basis that two wrongs do not make a right. That cannot be justifiable argued over the last five years with information accessible to all.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ex_parte_frye_bpai_s#comment-1268396294000
Re: Ex Parte Frye: BPAIβs Standard of Review of Examinersβ Rejections
John Rogitz
2010-03-12T07:18:14-05:00
2010-03-12T07:18:14-05:00
Great news Mr. Kappos, thanks.
Looking forward to the April 7 appeal conference. One question I intend to raise is why the PTO is now refusing to refund the appeal fees when prosecution is reopened (seemingly the default response to appeals in many art units these days). The refusals all rationalize that "the appeal brief and notice were considered" but of course that is incorrect. The appeal fees are for the Board to review the case, not for an examiner to decide he was wrong after all and then churn prosecution by reopening, shortstopping the applicant from Board review.
Absent corrective action on the epidemic of reopenings, don't you think it fair that applicants at least get their appeal fees back when it happens?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ex_parte_frye_bpai_s#comment-1268174426000
Re: Ex Parte Frye: BPAIβs Standard of Review of Examinersβ Rejections
Intellectual Property News
2010-03-09T17:40:26-05:00
2010-03-09T17:40:26-05:00
[Trackback] Ex Parte Frye , BPAI Appeal 2009-006013 (February 26, 2010) Precedential Appellant appealed a 102 rejection
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1267716655000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
Sabra-Anne Truesdale
2010-03-04T10:30:55-05:00
2010-03-04T10:30:55-05:00
The compact prosecution principle may be operating for regular examination, but my recent experience is that it is ignored during reissue applications. I'm currently prosecuting a reissue application that was filed September 14, 2001. No office actions have been issued, despite the fact that reissue applications are supposed to be treated as "special" (MPEP 1442). In this particular situation, the USPTO lost the file for the patent being reissued. They asked me for the file in 2008, and I sent it to them. They asked me again for the file in 2010, and I sent it to them again. I hope to receive an office action soon.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/madrid_protocol_challenges_facing_trademark#comment-1267689687000
Re: Madrid Protocol: Challenges Facing Trademark Filers
Jonathan
2010-03-04T03:01:27-05:00
2010-03-04T03:01:27-05:00
I would like to draw to your attention the challenges USPTO has not addressed in the age of instant information; That is the number of anomalies in recent USPTO decisions where (I will not state specific cases) USPTO attorneys have allowed marks to be approved and other marks that are identical in circumstance are refused (nothing I am personally involved in, part of my masters course)
I have looked at innumerable cases and even in the last three months there is a case where the exact same trademark application was approved by two independent USPTO attorneys and refused by another.
It is my opinion that USPTO should know that clarity and consistency of treatment should be imperative ?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/good_news_for_design_patent#comment-1267648041000
Re: Good News for Design Patent Holders
Rajiv
2010-03-03T15:27:21-05:00
2010-03-03T15:27:21-05:00
I'm for any decision that results in fewer companies making footwear that look like Crocs. Ideally, the number should be zero.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/good_news_for_design_patent#comment-1267630875000
Re: Good News for Design Patent Holders
Matthew Dowd
2010-03-03T10:41:15-05:00
2010-03-03T10:41:15-05:00
Just wanted to write that the Director's Forum is a great idea.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1267522063000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Adam
2010-03-02T04:27:43-05:00
2010-03-02T04:27:43-05:00
I have not checked if the MPEP addresses internal assignment of applications for examination. I believe that prosecution time can signficantly be reduced if one examiner handles an entire patent family (i.e., parent, continuations, divisionals). All too often different examiners handle different members of a family and too much work is repeated. There should be more tranfers of applications to one examiner when related applications are assigned to different examiners.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1266919074000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
bill
2010-02-23T04:57:54-05:00
2010-02-23T04:57:54-05:00
The PTO that must set policy and procedure...not the bar, attorney, inventors or some collaborative community. In short, while help from others with the style and design and providing an easy submission for feedback for consideration from within the patent community can be a good idea, the overall content of MPEP should remain exclusively a function of the PTO, who guards all areas of the public interest, and not those that benefit exclusively one group or another.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1266919042000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
bill
2010-02-23T04:57:22-05:00
2010-02-23T04:57:22-05:00
While it can lag behind, this is more a factor how fast legal issues are changing and courts offering little guidance in their decisions. Too often, the MPEP is in limbo as we wait for a next more guiding decisions from the Courts. The years from business methods, to State Street, to Bilski, is a good example. The bad part of Dir's idea is to consider "authoring and contributing techniques such as those that have enabled collaborative communities to author". It is not the Manual of the Patent Bar or the Prolific Inventor. It is for Examining Procedure, which is critical to the function of the PTO to protect the public domain, maintain quality opinions and promote efficiency examination.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1266918860000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
bill
2010-02-23T04:54:20-05:00
2010-02-23T04:54:20-05:00
However, the content of MPEP is actually impressive and should reamin exclusively set by PTO. While it can lag behind, this is more a factor how fast legal issues are changing and courts offering little guidance in their decisions. Too often, the MPEP is in limbo as we wait for a next more guiding decisions from the Courts. The years from business methods, to State Street, to Bilski, is a good example. The bad part of Dir's idea is to consider "authoring and contributing techniques such as those that have enabled collaborative communities to author". It is not the Manual of the Patent Bar or the Prolific Inventor. It is for Examining Procedure, which is critical to the function of the PTO to protect the public domain, maintain quality opinions and promote efficiency examination. The PTO that must set policy and procedure...not the bar, attorney, inventors or some collaborative community. In short, while help from others with the style and design and providing an easy submission for feedback for consideration from within the patent community can be a good idea, the overall content of MPEP should remain exclusively a function of the PTO, who guards all areas of the public interest, and not those that benefit exclusively one group or another.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1266918514000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
bill
2010-02-23T04:48:34-05:00
2010-02-23T04:48:34-05:00
First, the MPEP is impressive for what it does with such vast amounts of information and the guidance that it gives on scenarios that are changing dailey as the law changes. However, like everything changes can always be made. Here it must be broken into 2 parts, 1)implementation and 2)content.
Clearly, there is so much new electronic technology that has yet been applied to the MPEP that would improve the style and accessibility of its information. As mentioned by others, hyperlinks, concordances and etc. could make a more useful too. This is the good part of Dir. Kappos's idea.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1266503347000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Dipak Shah
2010-02-18T09:29:07-05:00
2010-02-18T09:29:07-05:00
Director Kappos,
With the renewed interest in increasing the Patent Examiner Corps, is there serious consideration being given to what the Office calls "Hoteling", and in particular extending this option to new hires with patent prosecution experience?
Also, is the Office considering establishing satellites in one or more locations around the country?
I believe the pool of candidates will increase significantly if either or both of the above were adopted.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spe_pap_award_task_force#comment-1266354525000
Re: Director's Response: SPE PAP β Award Task Force
Susan
2010-02-16T16:08:45-05:00
2010-02-16T16:08:45-05:00
I want to thank you for all the work you are doing to reform the USPTO including reforming SPEs, Directors, etc.'s Pap and also noting the contribution of examiners to the USPTO. I really think you are sincere in what you want to do. Just have one question/comment though. Do you intend to hold some of the managers, TC directors, Assistant Deputy Commissioners over TCs who are responsible for holding up applicant's patent applications, and making examiners put extreme rejections in their work from 2001 to 2008 accountable?
Many if not most of these managers are still in their positions and have not been moved, the only one that has been moved is Doll. I think the truth is that if these managers are not held accountable, the USPTO will never be able to cut out its waste and live within its budget. Some of the managers are responsible for the high attrition rate among the examiner's corps.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/working_through_snowmageddon#comment-1266348395000
Re: Working Through Snowmageddon
Eric
2010-02-16T14:26:35-05:00
2010-02-16T14:26:35-05:00
I am not sure where else to put this but how about making a USPTO iPhone Application or Mobile-Friendly site? Thanks! Eric
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1266323058000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Paul F. Morgan
2010-02-16T07:24:18-05:00
2010-02-16T07:24:18-05:00
A logical first step would seem to be for the PTO to first seek input from the patent bar as to which sections of the MPEP need revisions the most. [Such as those relating to restriction practice - see prior AIPLA and other public input on that subject.] Also, requests for identifications of specific errors needing corrections.
I agree with others that then it would make more sense for the PTO itself to prepare and publish drafts of revised or new MPEP sections, and to ask for public input on those drafts, instead of some kind of unstructured system.
[Especially since prior experience even with proposed RULE changes [other than the massive and disastrous Dudas-era rule proposals] demonstrates that normally a very high percentage of the experienced working patent bar does not react to proposed PTO changes until after they are operative, and/or does not propose workable alternative language.”
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265916606000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Paul F. Morgan
2010-02-11T14:30:06-05:00
2010-02-11T14:30:06-05:00
One longstanding problem with the MPEP has been an inadequate index.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1265841579000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
Joe
2010-02-10T17:39:39-05:00
2010-02-10T17:39:39-05:00
One of the most important issues we all need to consider both legally and ethically is what the original intent of the United State Patent system was developed for and why are the law subjective, or can be interperated by two different individuals with opposing opinions. I believe the system was developed to inspire innovation and new ideas. In my opinion, someone who may not understand an industry or relative art can now question the innovation submitted to the USPTO for a patent and decline the allowance of the invention. It becomes more difficult to work the system and rules when their is no black and white process in place to determine
what is allowable or not allowable. For every good claim argument , their now can be a adverse argument because nothing is really new we are just using elements from what exists to create new ideas for better living...
So, I ask does KSR hinder innovation or does it just make the cost of patent work rise to the occasion.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265730770000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Robert K S
2010-02-09T10:52:50-05:00
2010-02-09T10:52:50-05:00
(...continued) One solution might be that only registered practitioners would be permitted to edit the wiki, and misconduct on the wiki could then be met with appropriate punitive action, but this would perhaps be too draconian and might not solve all the problems I list. In any case, porting the HTML MPEP to a wiki right away and seeing how well it does for a few months might be a valuable experiment and could be done by anyone in just a day or two.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265730741000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Robert K S
2010-02-09T10:52:21-05:00
2010-02-09T10:52:21-05:00
Great suggestion, David. It would be nice to see a non-authoritative wiki "working draft" of the MPEP to which many more people could contribute. This would reduce workload on USPTO staff and permit more frequent and timely MPEP updates (e.g. the MPEP could see a USPTO-vetted and electronically published update within a few weeks after a major case ruling rather than half a year or more). However, the wiki would suffer many of the same problems as other wikis (edit wars, imbalance, poor sourcing, misinformation, vandalism, content bloat, opinion/POV) and dealing with these issues would require sensitive and judicious administration. (continued...)
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265651030000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
John Meline
2010-02-08T12:43:50-05:00
2010-02-08T12:43:50-05:00
We need something like a wiki with a deadline to freeze the next revision - something like releasing a new software version every few months. We need a system that accepts meaningful footnotes to current case law. We need a place for persistent comments from practitioners where the comments persist from version to version - but only if accepted by a moderator. The comments would not be part of the official MPEP but could be a source of tutoring practitioners and educating self-filing inventors. We need a moderator for each section of the MPEP, a moderator with real power to authoritatively accept and reject changes. We need to open up each section to comments, have deadlines for a new revision Overall, something that should get simpler over time, not more complex.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265645401000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Patent.drafter
2010-02-08T11:10:01-05:00
2010-02-08T11:10:01-05:00
A well-moderated Wiki would be a wonderful enhancement to the MPEP. In particular, a wiki would give room to ventilate all the debates over policy and precedent ... the moderation could help keep the debate on track by requiring citation to primary references, etc. A wiki also would give practitioners and Examiners opportunity to resolve the relevance of the precedents presently cited in the MPEP ... a good number of those cases (both favoring and disfavoring applicants) are not firmly on-point to the proposition they are asserted to support, and some of the cases that do appear to be on-point actually are cited only for their dicta, not for their core holding. Wiki format would give an opportunity for all parties to improve the process by supplementing the MPEP's very sparse parsing of case law.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265629365000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Frank H. Foster
2010-02-08T06:42:45-05:00
2010-02-08T06:42:45-05:00
Terrific idea to make use of the wiki concept. Please keep the community authored material separately identified from the official USPTO authored material. Each official MPEP section could have a single link to the corresponding wiki section. Encourage examiners to contribute. A wiki could make us all better.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265621130000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Don Champagne, Primary Examiner
2010-02-08T04:25:30-05:00
2010-02-08T04:25:30-05:00
The MPEP is desperately in need of improvement, but let's improve it systematically with a series of experiments. The Supreme Court's Bilski decision will have a profound effect on examining practice in many areas. Perhaps commission three different substantive approaches to address how Bilski is incorporated into the MPEP. I personally would like to see the MPEP include hyperlinks to case law as well as links to commentary by people outside of the Office. The Wiki idea is intriguing and should be tested.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265619060000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Paul Cole
2010-02-08T03:51:00-05:00
2010-02-08T03:51:00-05:00
Revising a work which has grown over many years demands a careful approach. However, such works tend to to grow and become increasingly complex, and a search for ways of simplifying the text and finding common principles is desirable.
As an example the basic requirements for a prima facie case of obviousness in MPEP 2143 include six rationales, five of which are essentially based on whether or not the claimed features lead to predictable results. That common feature has been known as an indicator of patentability since litigation in England in the late eighteenth century concerning James Watt's separate condenser patent. The requirement for a new result has been understood and accepted by US practitioners since the early nineteenth century as recorded by decisions and legal textbooks of that time. It is therefore suggested that unification and simplification of at lest five of the rationales is possible.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265578811000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
R Kahn
2010-02-07T16:40:11-05:00
2010-02-07T16:40:11-05:00
Certain aspects of this project are well-understood such as browser access to documents and multi-threaded comments. Other aspects are likely to be custom. For example, consider a section of the MPEP discussed by thousands of messages over several years; if the section is updated once per month, new technology would be needed to relate messages to the versions to which they apply. Sayre's suggestion for caselaw citations would probably be a custom feature. A proprietary system will age poorly so keep these non-mission critical tools in the public domain by contracting for modifications from existing open source communities and contributing the extensions back to those communities. Repurpose software code review tools to allow the community to "vote up" suggestions, USPTO reviewers to assign suggestions to committees, and validate that "patches" to the MPEP are properly authorized. I recommend starting small to get something working quickly and to learn from what works well.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1265560123000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
James K. Poole, Esq.
2010-02-07T11:28:43-05:00
2010-02-07T11:28:43-05:00
Dear Director Kappos, I concur with the above comment re fee structure. Anything that can be done to encourage examiners to identify patentable subject matter would help, but this is difficult with the decreasing experience level of examiners. I believe you are encouraging SPE's to do more mentoring and supervision, which could help. Also, the Pre-Appeal Brief Conference is a good concept, except that the Conference participants can simply check a box and send the appeal to the Board if they do not see something drastically wrong with the Examiner's actions. Some feedback could be helpful, even if the claims are deemed suitable for appeal. The objectives of getting applicants and examiners to reach consensus or define issues sooner rather than later could be advanced by encouraging more interviews, particularly personal. Examiners shoud be encouraged to grant interviews when feasible, rather than only at their convenience.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265559571000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
James K. Poole, Esq.
2010-02-07T11:19:31-05:00
2010-02-07T11:19:31-05:00
Dear Mr. Kappos, In almost 30 years of patent practice, both private and corporate, I have found the MPEP invaluable as a teaching reference and authority. I haven't bought a paper version lately, but have found it very useful for reading sections to get not only specific answers but perspective, context and other angles. Use of the online version only has the same advantages and disadvantages as computerized legal research. While practitioner input could help to produce a better publication, I DO NOT recommend the wiki approach, as it would diminish the perceived reliability and authority of the MPEP. Providing links to USPQ cites (BPAI, TTAB particularly) and use of Federal Reporter cites as available would help; the latter would also be helpful in Office Actions, etc. Many of us find the USPQ inconvenient or expensive to access. Updates to particular sections could be noted at the end of a section. Thanks for seeking our advice!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265554470000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Mike O'Keeffe
2010-02-07T09:54:30-05:00
2010-02-07T09:54:30-05:00
Clearly electronic filing and prosecution is the way to go. But why stop at computerizing the current system ? Why not have patent disclosures (not claims) filed in a grammatical format which computer translation can digest/translate ? Caterpillar has been using just such a system for bulldozer manuals for years and has a soon to expire patent on it. Basically the USPTO should put a tender out for a word processor which would guide and oblige the drafter to input compliant text, like MS Word does with red, green and blue underling, except that it would not allow the author to save until the rules were met. Inventors would save a bundle on subsequent translations, and the reading public would get more intelligible patent text and competitors could search full text with better results. Claims should initially be excluded so as to not limit the legal protection but at least this would prevent inventors from cutting-and-pasting the text of the claims to the Summary of the Invention.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1265543605000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
Jeff Knapp
2010-02-07T06:53:25-05:00
2010-02-07T06:53:25-05:00
In following up on John G.'s post, wouldn't it make sense for there to be some means of billing applicants for just the claims that are substantively examined? A way to do that would to be charge for the excess number of claims but to place that amount in an escrow. Once substantive examination (i.e., beyond any restriction) begins, the appropriate excess claim fee could be assessed and any remainder returned to applicant.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265538840000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Susan Tees
2010-02-07T05:34:00-05:00
2010-02-07T05:34:00-05:00
I am a practitioner living in Canada. The MPEP is one of the least appealing sources for information that I use, all because of the organization of materials.
How about the MPEP being a third layer of linked information under electronic versions of the Statute and Regulations. Through the Statute, one would be able to dive through links into the Regulations and MPEP guidance. The process of preparing this material would also guide a firm-handed editing out of the redundancy in the MPEP.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate!
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265491549000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Blaise Mouttet
2010-02-06T16:25:49-05:00
2010-02-06T16:25:49-05:00
Speaking as a patent searcher and former examiner it would also be very useful to use wikis for doing revisions to the Patent Classification Schedule. The disorganization and mismanagement of the classification system is a disgrace.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265479444000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Robert Hayden
2010-02-06T13:04:04-05:00
2010-02-06T13:04:04-05:00
Please do something about section 800. It is nearly incomprehensible. Some definitions might be helpful. To make a species election requirement, for example, shouldn't it be necessary to identify a genus to which all of the species belong, or does "species" have a different meaning than "a member of a genus?"
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265465078000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Josh Collie
2010-02-06T09:04:38-05:00
2010-02-06T09:04:38-05:00
This is an awesome idea, Director Kappos! I think a community-driven MPEP would be most helpful to all current and hopeful patent practitioners. I would suggest locking the actual content to preserve some officiality/cannon aspect of the content. However, some sort of discussion, feedback, or other meta content should be available to the public, usable to point out errors and inconsistencies or ask questions not specifically addressed. The official content could then be updated/corrected/clarified to reflect USPTO position on the public comments.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265449340000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Courtenay Brinckerhoff
2010-02-06T04:42:20-05:00
2010-02-06T04:42:20-05:00
I would like to see the MPEP be more balanced. Instead of merely providing rationales for rejecting applications, it also should include guidelines for when requirements are satisfied and/or when rejections should be withdrawn, perhaps with examples from Board or Fedeal Circuit decisions. For example, the current MPEP states that Applicant's rebuttal evidence should be considered, but doesn't provide any guidance on what type/quantity/quality of evidence is sufficient to overcome a rejection.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265385267000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Michael F. Martin
2010-02-05T10:54:27-05:00
2010-02-05T10:54:27-05:00
Consider consulting Jimbo Wales, founder of Wikipedia, on the project. Not many have his experience, and this is an important cause.
Consider also consulting one of the lawyers who works as an editor for Wikipedia, such as the lawyer who blogged about this experience on the Volokh Conspiracy last year:
http://volokh.com/posts/1242444024.shtml
This kind of experience might also be very useful for this project.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265363038000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
MIke
2010-02-05T04:43:58-05:00
2010-02-05T04:43:58-05:00
Mr. Kappos.
By trade I am a Technical Writer. We as Tech Writers use several tools to help us accomplish publishing large documents, while publishing over several media, and also keeping the content portable.
We use Help Authoring Tools, or HAT's for short. HAT's such as RoboHelp or Madcap Flare are multimedia authoring tools that will publish to print (PDF), Web or other "new" media formats.
I can only speak of Adobe RoboHelp, but RoboHalp can actually export a searchable, indexed document to a PDF document, HTML page and AIR application simultaneously using XML and CSS. One source document transformed into multiple formats. RoboHelp is part of the Technical Communicator Suite 2.0 from Adobe. I invite you to take a look at it...by the way I am not a salesman from Adobe.
Although the software is expensive, it pales in comparison to the extended cost of hundreds of people searching an archaic, glorified Word Document.
Thank you for your time.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265238194000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Bob Sayre, Modern Times Legal
2010-02-03T18:03:14-05:00
2010-02-03T18:03:14-05:00
(Continued) It would also be very helpful to both applicants and examiners if case citations in the MPEP included active links to the actual decisions, especially if the decisions were in a citation-friendly format so that we could use a common (and free) form of citation when referencing a case from the MPEP that could also enable an examiner to readily view the language we are citing within the context of the full decision. Finally, this model would provide an intriguing interplay and juxtaposition both (a) between the proprietary rights of patents and open-sourced knowledge and (b) between the government and the people—which could probably make for a compelling article in a publication such as Wired.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265237856000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Bob Sayre, Modern Times Legal
2010-02-03T17:57:36-05:00
2010-02-03T17:57:36-05:00
Thanks for the creative thought and openness to new ideas. Real benefits could include (a) rolling, up-to-date revisions incorporating new law (with real-time IP community input) and (b) more depth, as the pool of informed contributors for providing on-point decisions and different viewpoints would be so much broader. If the community believes contributions will appear, I believe you will see a strong response; Wikipedia proves how well this model can work (even if garbage is occasionally posted, it gets corrected and is vastly outweighed by useful info.). Community contributions will not be controlling law, though neither is the USPTO-authored MPEP. Integration of Guidelines and Examiner education materials would also be valuable. For example, on Friday in Cambridge, you mentioned the Examiner Interview Training Materials. I tracked them down on the USPTO site and found them quite helpful. Materials like these should be linked where the topics are discussed in the MPEP.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/reengineering_the_mpep#comment-1265210964000
Re: Reengineering the MPEP
Scott
2010-02-03T10:29:24-05:00
2010-02-03T10:29:24-05:00
Two suggestion for the MPEP:
1) Examples of cases (or hypotheticals if necessary) that show both sides of a rule. I.e. an example when the term 'about' is indefinite and an example when the term 'about' is not indefinite.
2) Examples when an Examiner's reasons to combine are mere conclusory statements and when they are sufficient to support a prima facie case of obviousness.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1265122312000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
John Gorecki
2010-02-02T09:51:52-05:00
2010-02-02T09:51:52-05:00
One aspect of the current fee strucutre seems to be unfair to applicants. If I file an application with 30 claims (3 independent) I will pay $52 per claim extra for 10 claims, or $520 extra. If the Examiner picks up the case and immediately enters a restriction requirement, I can't get those claim fees back, even though the Examiner will never act on the claims. Assume, for example, that the Examiner restricts out claims 21-30. I have paid $520 to have these claims examined, but the Examiner has refused to do so. In that event, it would seem that the USPTO should be required to refund the extra claim fees, or at least most of the extra claim fees. Alternatively, if the applicant then files a divisional application, it would seem fair to reduce the cost of the divisional application by the amout of extra claim fees the applicant had already paid in the first case.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1265120789000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
carl r martin
2010-02-02T09:26:29-05:00
2010-02-02T09:26:29-05:00
Sir:
please be advised independent inventor(s?) such as myself, who produce new inventions/technology that is of high value respecting military usefuleness
are not being notified or paid for the taking of such when governmental entites utilize such for the benefit of involved contractors and us gov benefit;
expecially as relates to the taking of classified level work product.
Ie, civ 06 114, us dist ct ed dist of ok-- one instance of 30 yr taking/monitoring/control/cover-up of
theft of inventor's work product for use in secret us gov programs.
s. carl r. martin
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1264901977000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
inventor-0875
2010-01-30T20:39:37-05:00
2010-01-30T20:39:37-05:00
Director Kappos,
Congress has previously diverted ~$752M from the USPTO, which is roughly equal to the applicant fees paid for the queued applications. I suggest that Congress immediately replace the ~$752M (plus interest), say ~1.2B, previously diverted and establish an escrow model for queued applications. Establish flexible funding at the USPTO, so that as the backlog/queue is reduced, the corresponding escrow fees become available for the patent office to use. An escrow model would a) prevent future fee diversion by Congress; b) act as a rate smoothing buffer so that patent office funding is insulated from short term variations in new application filings and c) allow the queue can be reduced ASAP. Congress could use stimulus money to immediately fund the USPTO escrow funding model ... without waiting for resolution of any patent reform legislation. The politicians can use the publicity.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/thanks_patents_team_compact_prosecution#comment-1264800619000
Re: Thanks Patents Team -- Compact Prosecution is Working!!!
BOBBIE GORE
2010-01-29T16:30:19-05:00
2010-01-29T16:30:19-05:00
Dear Director, At times our patent prosecution has certainly been difficult.... Your leadership has given me new hope. I believe these changes will assist the hard working examiners as well as the inventor's. Thank-you.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1264762989000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
Chris
2010-01-29T06:03:09-05:00
2010-01-29T06:03:09-05:00
Mr. Kappos - have you given any thought to developing an intellectual property portfolio management strategy for the US Government and its research labs? I would be interested in hearing your inputs on what, for example, vision statements should be for the various tiers of a Federal agency, such as in the Dept of Defense, for its intellectual property program.
Thanks!
Chris
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spe_pap_award_task_force#comment-1264497201000
Re: Director's Response: SPE PAP β Award Task Force
Wiz
2010-01-26T04:13:21-05:00
2010-01-26T04:13:21-05:00
I strongly agree with the above post to the point. Very good comment.
http://www.methodvault.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1264251193000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Kenneth R. Schena
2010-01-23T07:53:13-05:00
2010-01-23T07:53:13-05:00
Director Kappos, I am very pleased to observe from the actions you have taken that the problems that exist in the prosecution of a patent application are being addressed. It is obvious that you recognize that the system has flaws which must be corrected in order to restore the entruprenurial spirit of inventors, so necessary to the future of our economy. I sincerely hope that you are able to implement regulations and procedures that will incent the processor to clearly identify the mandates sufficient to result in resolution and/or issuance - rejection of the application. My observation has been that peacemeal comments that could be resolved with a telephone call are stretched out 90 or more days creating expensive fees and delaying the process of conclusion. I am watching the actions you take with much optimism and hope.
Ken Schena
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spe_pap_award_task_force#comment-1263961824000
Re: Director's Response: SPE PAP β Award Task Force
vijay
2010-01-19T23:30:24-05:00
2010-01-19T23:30:24-05:00
Well, I would like to say that uspto is not utilising technology effectively in evaluating patents and continuing to rely solely on the expertise of its examiners to the exclusion of innumerable industry experts who would quickly be able to call out the nonsensical patents filed in large numbers.
Let me be more specific. If uspto were to publish each pending patent application on a wiki/blog like this one, it would be possible for various industry reviewers to point to specific reasons why/why not a patent should be approved, why/where its obvious, and so on. Its really quite a simple idea, and "peer review" has been shown to be successful elsewhere.
If this idea is interesting/and/or further input from me might help, contact me.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1262989660000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Air Jordan Shoes
2010-01-08T17:27:40-05:00
2010-01-08T17:27:40-05:00
Obviously the one year grace period must go in a first-to-file system. It’s an unreasonable fairy tale to believe that someone is going to start a project in their garage and expect to maintain secrecy indefinitely without filing first before beginning R&D. This is the only creditable way of expecting patent granting on either a garage project or an industrial product. Everything else is a patent theft granting. The only way a non-first filer claim should be granted is in the instance of espionage or accidental divulgement and in this instance, http://www.usa-jordan.com
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spe_performance_appraisal_plan_award#comment-1262771546000
Re: SPE Performance Appraisal Plan-Award Taskforce
CJ
2010-01-06T04:52:26-05:00
2010-01-06T04:52:26-05:00
As an independent inventor and strong believer in IP technology my mindset has changed in the recent years on the quality of support from the USPTO.
Aquiring several patents, and having an opportunity to go through patent litigation I am aware now of how complex the patent system really is and how subjective the rules and regulations are to one's opinion as opposed to underlying facts of what may or may not be patentable.
I have been awared a patent in one instance and later after filing a divisional patent was objected to claims that were in my primary patent. The patent itself was unique and no direct reference was made to show obviousness nor did the examiner site any relevant prior art that showed every element of the claim itself. The supervisory examaniner who had reviewed the prior application and approved the issuance of that patent, now in view of the new examination is willing to sign off on a final rejection with no merit to the (new) examiner's arguments. Arguments are made based on hindsightin view of other references, even when other references do not teach the contruction or every element of the claimed language.
I know the Patent and Trade office has to step up their examination and scrutiny on patent applications, but I feel the quota systems does not allow in some cases a fair assessment of patent applications.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/spe_performance_appraisal_plan_award#comment-1262190575000
Re: SPE Performance Appraisal Plan-Award Taskforce
James T. Struck
2009-12-30T11:29:35-05:00
2009-12-30T11:29:35-05:00
Please consider that inventors may face loss of rights in certain states. Some inventors may invent to invent and not to prohibit others from producing. Your participation with IBM shows that inventions involve controversy such as national socialist use of inventions associated with IBM (alleged use of device to keep track of people in camps). Some inventors may want to use patents like art to design or do art not to prohibit others. Invention as art should probably be considered or thought about. Inventors who face loss of all rights in certain states for being different should probaby be considered. thanks for your work and effort. what if an inventor just wants to show they can be like edison and produce art and NOT prohibit others from making or producing. They want to show a concept or idea to others?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1262055113000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
MaxDrei
2009-12-28T21:51:53-05:00
2009-12-28T21:51:53-05:00
TZ, from Europe, I don't understand. Why don't USPTO Examiners note the claims but then focus the search on the worked Example or the illustrated embodiment. Thereafter, no matter how much Applicant narrows down the claim, the search references are still biting with full force on the amended claims. If Applicant switches to a different invention, the consequence should be that, if he wants to pursue it, he has to file a continuing application.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1262004820000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
MaxDrei
2009-12-28T07:53:40-05:00
2009-12-28T07:53:40-05:00
To TZ: In that case, can you explain how the EPO gets away with only one search no matter how broad the claim, and still retains the reputation of doing a much better search than the USPTO?
Why doesn't the USPTO ignore the absurd width of the independent claim and focus instead on the "heart" of the disclosed subject matter, that is, the illustrated embodiments (or the Examples). If that subject matter lacks novelty or is obvious, then the claims are bad, however broad they are.
And as for prosecution amendments that shift to an invention not contemplated in the app as filed, why not do as the EPO does, and invite Applicant to file a continuing application (called "divisional" in Europe), with another search fee.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1261664221000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
TZ
2009-12-24T09:17:01-05:00
2009-12-24T09:17:01-05:00
znutar,
Overcoming a rejection is never a reason for allowing a case and a subsequent Non final office action should not be the norm. But there are many reasons why such would occur. One of the main reasons I would suggest is an overly broad first set of claims. While a thorough search of the art (taking into account the spec) idealistically "should be made" on the first OA, overly broad initial claims do not have a "focused search". In practice due to the time constraints that the examiner is under, to continue searching once multiple 102s or solid 103s can be made with the art found would not be productive. On subsequent OA the applicant will amend, abandon or can take the initial issues in a wholly new direction. At that time a new or more focused seach becomes apparent possibly resulting in more art and a subsequent Non final.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1261580636000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
MaxDrei
2009-12-23T10:03:56-05:00
2009-12-23T10:03:56-05:00
I'm a European patent attorney and I don't understand that last comment from Budzyn. EPO-PSA is a form of TSM. It is objective and fair. It excludes ex post facto analysis and has no difficulty dealing with "non-analogous art". Why not ask those US corporations who prosecute just as many EPO oppositions as opponent as they do in the role of patent owner.
EPO-PSA was devised in the first place to get the EPO operating consistently, from the get go in 1978, when all Examiners were newbies in Munich, even while each brought with her the ingrained obviousness mindset of her home Patent Office and Patent Courts.
Why not adopt EPO-PSA as the default obviousness tool at the USPTO? KSR doesn't stop you doing that, does it?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1261418106000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
Lou Budzyn
2009-12-21T12:55:06-05:00
2009-12-21T12:55:06-05:00
I think there needs to be a re-visiting of the concept of non-analogous art. The definition of non-analogous art was changed by the KSR guidelines. Under the KSR guidelines, any prior art cited by the Examiner is analogous because it was cited by the Examiner in the Office Action. See, MPEP 2141.01 (a). In other words, the citation of the prior art in the Office Action is a self-fulfilling prophesy in finding the prior art to be analogous. It is basically impossible to attack a reference as being non-analogous under the present standard.
With respect to EPO practice, like KSR, for a finding of obviousness (lack of inventive step in EPO speak), no TSM is required. However, it appears that the EPO is much more restrictive in considering what prior art is useable (i.e., determining what is analogous art).
A return to a definition of what is analgous art would be helpful and may add some objectivity in applying KSR.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/accelerating_green_innovation#comment-1261095517000
Re: Accelerating Green Innovation
TZ
2009-12-17T19:18:37-05:00
2009-12-17T19:18:37-05:00
...and another bad idea from the new management of the PTO to demonstrate how out of touch they are with the organization that they heading. I echo Jay's comments. If we make these cases a priority and the other technologies are pushed back. Why is "green" any better than "a new method for curing AIDS" or Breast Cancer? Why make these petitions free while the elderly on a fixed income have to pay to make special?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1260788408000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Michael R. Thomas Inventing Consultant
2009-12-14T06:00:08-05:00
2009-12-14T06:00:08-05:00
Director Kappos states that there is no risk of someone who learns of your invention beating you the patent office because they’re not an inventor. This of course is another fairy tale. All off the valuable patents are actually stolen using a large variety of methods including these ones and the only way to change these dismal statistics is to implement new inventorship determination methods as I have proposed in my new legislation. Obviously the one year grace period must go in a first-to-file system. It’s an unreasonable fairy tale to believe that someone is going to start a project in their garage and expect to maintain secrecy indefinitely without filing first before beginning R&D. This is the only creditable way of expecting patent granting on either a garage project or an industrial product. Everything else is a patent theft granting. The only way a non-first filer claim should be granted is in the instance of espionage or accidental divulgement and in this instance, the initial disclosure document program needs to be reinstated. This filing should be allowed in hand writing and be required to be recorded or post marked within three days of each other in order to establish the inventorship dispute. Also, the cost should only be $65.00 and allowed to be used with the existing EFS system.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1260538361000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
znutar
2009-12-11T08:32:41-05:00
2009-12-11T08:32:41-05:00
This is the closest I'm likely to get to asking Director Kappos a direct question, and I think my comment is perhaps no more irrelevant than the prior post, so hopefully it survives the moderator's black pen.
I'd like to know why I see multiple non-final actions in so many cases. A first NFOA issues, I overcome the rejections without claim amendments, and rather than seeing allowance, out comes another search and another NFOA no better than the last. I recently went through three NFOAs in a row before obtaining an allowance. If the Examiner does a competent search, makes a rejection, and the rejection is overcome, why isn't that enough? It might help the backlog if Examiners were not examining the same application multiple times.
Please direct Examiners to allow cases when the arguments overcome the rejections without amendment.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/accelerating_green_innovation#comment-1260532474000
Re: Accelerating Green Innovation
broje
2009-12-11T06:54:34-05:00
2009-12-11T06:54:34-05:00
I have three questions, please.
The notice states that the application must be previously filed before the date of the notice. Does that mean "actually pending," or might it mean "accorded a US effective filing date" (e.g., a continuing application filed after the date of the notice and having a priority date that falls before the date of the notice)?
Also, the notice clarifies that the application will not be placed on the special docket after the first examination, but is silent in the case of later filing an RCE. Does grant of the petition in an application that has never been examined cause that application to be treated differently in the future if that application is placed back in the new application queue for any reason, such as if an RCE is filed?
Finally, the notice states that the petition must be filed at least one day before a first Office action appears in the PAIR system. I am am led to wonder because, when an RCE is filed, at least some of us generally term the next Office action a "first" Office action. The new rule placing RCEs in the queue with newly filed applications would also seem to suggest a possibility that the application might be eligible to be advanced out of that queue by filing the petition. Is that possible, or can the petition only be granted for applications that have never been examined?
Thank-you
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/accelerating_green_innovation#comment-1260364474000
Re: Accelerating Green Innovation
Jay
2009-12-09T08:14:34-05:00
2009-12-09T08:14:34-05:00
Dear Mr. Kappos:
It is the opinion of all my colleagues who work in IP that priority for examination should not be given to any particular type of invention, regardless of whether said invention is "green" or "black." In a truly fair and equal system, applications that pass the initial formalities should be examined in the order they are received, unless a further request for expedited examination is granted. Why should other inventors' applications, whose inventions may be equal or more worthwhile of protection than so-called green inventions, be relegated to the end of the queue simply because they are not green? Why should businesses who trade in green technology have a no-cost advantage over those who do not?
We respectfully urge you to reconsider this pilot program at once. Showing favoritism to one invention type over another is not a good idea (apart from 37 CFR 1.102 petitions). Perhaps it would be best simply to staff more examiners, who deal primarily with green technologies, on the quiet. Perhaps the USPTO could spend some time improving its web site search capabilities? Perhaps showing favoritism pleases the green movement and politicians, but we feel rather aggrieved.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1260299925000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
James F. Boland
2009-12-08T14:18:45-05:00
2009-12-08T14:18:45-05:00
I applaud your efforts to solicit suggestions for improving the operations of the Office from the customers of the USPTO. It is my opinion that a functional and efficient USPTO can only be obtained by the repeal of all existing LAWS and the enactment of new laws that address the intellectual property issues of the 21st century. Urgent problems that can and should be addressed now have been identified in the DOC Inspector Generals Reports. Apparently, you do not receive information related to the USPTO that is submitted to the Inspector General’s Hotline and I suggest that you make arrangements to obtain this information. I would also like to call your attention to a letter to Jon W. Dudas from Judith J Gordon, Assistant Inspector General for Audit and Evaluation, dated August 12, 2008, Subject: Audit of USPTO’s Quality Assurance Process. I believe the Report of this audit could be very helpful to you in your efforts to become informed about Quality Assurance at the USPTO.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/accelerating_green_innovation#comment-1260282007000
Re: Accelerating Green Innovation
A
2009-12-08T09:20:07-05:00
2009-12-08T09:20:07-05:00
How is this different from the existing Petition to Make Special under 37 CFR 1.102?
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/director_s_forum_david_kappos#comment-1260214853000
Re: Putting the USPTO to Work for Independent Inventors
Robert A. Baker
2009-12-07T14:40:53-05:00
2009-12-07T14:40:53-05:00
In regards to the backlog, one can either pass poor patents quickly or return poor patents quickly. Writing is often not the inventor's strong point, but some patents are, frankly, irreadable. It is hard to believe the Examiner actually understood what s/he has passed. Patents that are knock-offs of Japanese patents, for example, can read like "mock English". It is impossible to determine what has been patented. Perhaps examiners are reluctanct to admit they don't understand a patent. A Japanese knock-off may be passed by assuming the Japanese Office did the hard part. Whatever the origin of a patent, it does no one a favor to pass a patent unless it is clear what has been patented. If after x minutes/hours Examiner A can't figure it out, pass it to a co-worker and perhaps y minutes/hours later, pass it back to the inventor. Require quality in the first instance.
https://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/facilitating_development_of_the_law#comment-1259944510000
Re: Facilitating Development of the Law
Robert A. Baker
2009-12-04T11:35:10-05:00
2009-12-04T11:35:10-05:00
I think the Bilski decision was correct. It is obvious that we live in a new time, and we need new law.
The original laws, 1793 and 1952, were written when machines and manufacturing were all the rage. The bias of patent law is no surprise. But it is the law.
We might speculate where computers and business practices ought to fit in, but neither the court nor the PTO should be making law. (Should there be a a business practice patent, and if so, would it deserve the same protection as a drug patent?)
There are thousands of partisans. These partisans need to be heard and reconciled. That is Congress's job. Lobbyists should not be knocking on the door of the Court.