Skip over navigation

Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 8:19 AM

Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 8:19 AM

To :

Subject : Comments to proposed rules --

Comments to proposed rules -

The proposed rules regarding IDSs is contrary to the spirit of our patent laws that the Commissioner. has the responsibility for determining patentability of inventions. Allowing Examiners that carry the responsibility to only "cursorily" review prior art, and therefore only focus on 1-3 prior art references may undermine the examination process and produce little value to applicants. Will the presumption of validity apply to prior art references only cursorily reviewed?

Should we convert the PTO to a registration system and let the courts settle all disputes including patetability, particularly in view of the PTO's apparent inability to review all pertinent references completely?

With respect to the proposed changes to the drawings, these proposed rules seem to be a step back, instead of forward. How will we ever move to an electronic filing system, let alone an electronic file wrapper ? Examiner's will have to also decide whether the drawings are clear enough for scanning, in addition to photocopying. The real solution is to move to a standard that will allow applicants to be submitting drawings in electronic format.

How much longer will we have to live at the mercy of the inability of PTO's warehouse to monitor and inventory these millions of file histories? The only solution is to convert this paper into electronic form.

I would prefer if you did not use my name.

United States Patent and Trademark Office
This page is owned by Office of Patent Legal Administration.
Last Modified: 7/4/2009 5:02:38 PM