Although this particular warning was first issued in June, 2006, the European Patent Office re-issued an updated warning to patent applications regarding solicitations from patent registration organizations. The reissued warning (from January 8, 2008, noting the original June 29, 2006, warning date – link below) notes that “[n]umerous applicants and patent proprietors have informed the European Patent Office that firms and individuals using names, abbreviations or emblems that appear to be official have been inviting them to register patents in unofficial registers or publications.” These registration (and publication) organizations may actually do as they say, i.e. they may add a particular application to a “registry” or a “publication” that they either control or have access to, but such “registries” or “publications” have no official legal effect, and as such, no actual legal value to an applicant. A client of my firm recently contacted me regarding correspondence he had received from one of these organizations (actual organization name withheld, but starting with the initials “I.B.F.”), whereby the organization offered to list his PCT application in an international “registry” for a $1,633.50 fee. Although this organization notes that it is not affiliated with the USPTO and that the documentation is a solicitation, the organization uses the words “Bureau” and “International” it its name, and regardless of the registered attorney or agent who filed the application on behalf of the inventor, the organization sends the “service” documentation directly to the inventor. For additional information these warning provided by various patent offices, please see the links below.

EPO Warning: LINK
German Patent Office Warning (in German): LINK
UK Patent Office Warning: LINK
WIPO Warning: LINK

On Friday, the USPTO issued a press release confirming my earlier post (January 4, 2008, link below) regarding the implementation of the reCAPTCHA system. According to the USPTO press release (link below), “[t]he reCAPTCHA deployment was an immediate response to a system outage problem caused by bots.” Over the last couple of months it has sometimes been difficult, if not impossible, to access Public PAIR because of these “bots,” and in response the USPTO has implemented technology based upon “an industry-accepted security feature to ensure that humans, and not bots, are accessing computer programs.” The USPTO further notes that it “continues to explore long-term solutions to address the need for open access to the data by the Intellectual Property community,” as the USPTO is “committed to providing access to all available patent data to the public whenever required, and we are continuing to explore all alternatives to meet that goal.”

January 4, 2008 DDIP Post: LINK
USPTO Press Release: LINK
USPTO Public PAIR Webpage: LINK

If you have ever conducted patent business with the USPTO through its EFS-Web system and provided the USPTO with your e-mail address, you likely received a letter of gratitude from the Commissioner of Patents himself. John Doll, the present Commissioner of Patents for the USPTO, praised its e-Commerce customers, noting in part that “[t]he success of our electronic filing system, EFS-Web, could not have been achieved without the dedication, patience, time and effort contributed by our customers and stakeholders.” Although I still conduct some business with the USPTO by mail and fax, the majority of my own transactions with the USPTO are electronic, especially given that the time it takes to upload documentation for filing has reduced significantly over time, making most, if not all, EFS-Web transactions quick and easy to perform. I have included a number of EFS-Web links below for your convenience.

USPTO EFS-Web Help & Tutorial Webpage: LINK
USPTO EFS-Web FAQ Webpage: LINK
USPTO EFS-Web Benefits Webpage: LINK
USPTO EFS-Web Tutorials Webpage: LINK
USPTO EFS-Web Webinar Archive Webpage: LINK

--

Dear Valued Patents e-Commerce Customer,

Due to your commitment and support of the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) e-Commerce initiatives, the USPTO made tremendous strides in 2007. Together, we have achieved a significant goal by making electronic submissions of new patent applications and follow-on papers easier for the intellectual property community.

The success of our electronic filing system, EFS-Web, could not have been achieved without the dedication, patience, time and effort contributed by our customers and stakeholders. Due to the widespread usage of EFS-Web, the USPTO exceeded its fiscal year 2007 goal and received nearly 50 percent of all patent applications electronically. We know it isn’t easy to change an existing process, which makes us even more grateful that you have chosen to adopt EFS-Web.

We would like to thank you for also taking the time to provide the agency with feedback on all of our systems by participating in pilot programs, feedback questionnaires, and focus sessions. Your voice has helped drive the success of the USPTO and its e-Commerce goals.

We welcome your feedback as we continue to plan and implement new e-Commerce initiatives in 2008. Please send an e-mail to EFS.Training@USPTO.gov if you have any suggestions you would like to share. I look forward to the future and how we can continue to improve the patent prosecution process and the quality of patents in the new year.

Best wishes for a prosperous new year.

Sincerely,

John Doll
Commissioner for Patents

United States Patent and Trademark Office

Back in October, 2006, I compiled data regarding how quickly the U.S. Patent Office issues utility patents (link below). I began with the issue date of U.S. Patent No. 4,000,000 (December 28, 1976), and looked at how many days it took to issue the next 100,000 patents. I took increments of 100,000 patents through U.S. Patent No. 7,100,000 (issued on August 29, 2006), and calculated the number of days between each 100,000 patents issued. As could be expected, it took longer to issue patents earlier on, noting that the highest figure (658 days) occurred between the issuance of U.S. Patent No. 4,100,000 (July 11, 1978) and U.S. Patent No. 4,200,000 (April 29, 1980).

As I was curious to see how recent statistics compared to this information, so I obtained the newer data from the USPTO website, as well as older data to shorten the increments between data points from 100,000 utility patents to 50,000. The data shown in the graph above (click to open a larger version) begins with U.S. Patent No. 5,500,000 (issued on March 19, 2006), and ends with U.S. Patent No. 7,300,000 (issued on November 27, 2007), providing the number of days between issuance of 50,000 patents based upon the milestone patent numbers 5,500,000, 5,550,000, 5,600,000, and so forth. The last data point is the number of days between issuance of U.S. Patent No. 7,250,000 (issued July 31, 2007), and U.S. Patent No. 7,300,000, namely 119 days.

With the exception of a couple of 140 day increments, the number of days between the issuance of 50,000 U.S. patents appears to be around the 110 day range. Since U.S. Patent No. 5,500,000, the highest number of days between the issuance of 50,000 patents is 168 days (between U.S. Patent No. 5,600,000 and 5,650,000), and the lowest number is 91 days (between U.S. Patent No. 5,950,000 and 6,000,000). The last six data points (after the last of the two relatively recent 140 day increments) are 98 days, 98 days, 105 days, 112, days, 119 days, and 119 days, respectively. The average of the last ten data points is 115 days, while the average of the last twenty data points is 112 days.

October, 2006, DDIP Post: LINK

Starting this month, the USPTO has implemented a new technology on its website in an attempt to curb "disruptive use" of at least one of its online databases. If you are a heavy user of USPTO database resources like I am, you likely also experienced a number of instances in the past couple of months where Public PAIR was either extremely slow or completely inaccessible. Public PAIR (available at the link below) is the USPTO’s free patent application information retrieval system where users can access available documents pertaining to pending patent applications, issued patents, and abandoned patent applications. Common uses of Public PAIR include searches to identify status information for pending patent applications, access to documents within an application’s file history, and the identification of one or more additional patent applications within the same "family" of a particular patent application. The USPTO has identified common uses as including the ability to "[v]iew bibliographic data, status, file history, PDF file images ("IFW"), continuity, foreign priority, patent term adjustments & extensions, text & TIFF images of published applications & patents, maintenance fees, and online ordering of copies."

In the last couple of months, it appears that the use of automated programs (to obtain and perhaps download Public PAIR information and documentation) had significantly decreased overall public access to the same information. The USPTO introduced a "PAIR Usage Policy" stating that "To maintain general availability of USPTO information and services provided on the Internet, any activities or operations that cause a denial or diminution (decrease) of services to other customers, whether generated automatically or manually, may result in the Office’s denying access to the Office Internet resources to the offender." In response to this automated access, the USPTO implemented technology from Carnegie Mellon University called reCAPTCHA, which, according to the reCAPTCHA website (link below), "helps prevent automated abuse of your site (such as comment spam or bogus registrations) by using a CAPTCHA to ensure that only humans perform certain actions."

CAPTCHAs (short for "Completely Automated Turing Test To Tell Computers and Humans Apart") have been in use for a number of years now where the ability to use computers to access databases, online retail websites, and other resources has either hindered general public use of those same resources or has caused an unfair advantage by allowing automated access to those resources faster and more frequently than the public may have. If you have ever tried to purchase concert tickets online that are made available at a pre-announced time, and despite your best and quickest efforts you can only obtain last-row tickets, you understand what impact this type of technology can have.

The current use of reCAPTCHA allows Public PAIR users to choose which method of verification code entry to use at any particular time. The default method is the use of a stylized and somewhat difficult to read font to create two words that the user would need to type in before obtaining access to Public PAIR. The second method is the use of an audio challenge, whereby a series of numbers is read to the user with enough "feedback" and other background noise to make it somewhat difficult to hear the numbers being read to the user. As is the case with other websites utilizing this or a similar technology, if the user incorrectly enters the challenge information, a new challenge is provided to the user. So far, the only difficulty I have experienced with the reCAPTCHA verification system is that after successfully entering challenge information (both types of challenges), I was provided with a subsequent challenge when I should have instead been granted access to Public PAIR. This was only a periodic phenomenon and may have been browser-specific. However, once I was granted access, I had very quick access to the information I was looking for. Hopefully the implementation of this technology will allow patent practitioners and other members of the public to have quick and uninterrupted access to this useful database.

Public PAIR: LINK
USPTO’s Patent Electronic Business Center Webpage: LINK
reCAPTCHA Website: LINK

As noted in the December 26, 2007, Federal Register (link below), the USPTO has decided to revise some of its publication formats effective January 1, 2008. Specifically, the USPTO has discontinued its separate weekly publication of USPTO notices in paper form, and it has also discontinued its annual publication of the consolidated listing of notices pertaining to USPTO practices and procedures, which was also published in paper form. Instead of paper-form distribution, starting this year the USPTO will publish these notices electronically. In addition, and as a result of these changes, the volume and page numbers previously shown in the weekly publications will be carried forward to the electronic notices so that the overall readability will be “enhanced” and so that the public may easily be able to cite specific sections of the electronic notices. According to the USPTO notice, these changes are part of the “Presidential E-Government Initiatives” to “utilize technology in ways that will improve how Federal Agencies serve the public.” The electronic notices (the USPTO’s electronic Official Gazette (“eOG:P”)) will be available at the USPTO link below, along with all eOG:P notices since January, 2007.

Federal Register Excerpt: LINK
USPTO Electronic Notices Webpage: LINK

As noted by a recent Associated Press article via Yahoo! News (link below), a new book appears to provide “definitive evidence” that Alexander Graham Bell, the man recognized as being the inventor of the telephone, actually obtained his ideas from a rival inventor, Elisha Gray. In Seth Shulman’s book, entitled “The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret”, information pertaining to several “aggressive lawyers” and a “corrupt patent examiner” surrounds Bell’s own laboratory notebook and the “discovery” of a specific type of voice transmitter referenced therein over a twelve-day period when Bell traveled to Washington, DC, to answer patent-related questions. According to the brief description of the book from amazon.com (link below), “Bell furtively—and illegally—copied part of Elisha Gray's invention in the race to secure what would become the most valuable U.S. patent ever issued. And afterward, as Bell's device led to the world's largest monopoly, the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, he hid his invention's illicit beginnings.” Regardless of your position on who did indeed invent the telephone, this book looks to be quite an interesting read. Bell’s patent (U.S. Patent No. 174,465, entitled “Improvement in Telegraphy”), issued on March 7, 1876, includes a system claim (“A system of telegraphy in which the receiver is set in vibration by the employment of undulatory currents of electricity, substantially as set forth”), a combination claim (“The combination, substantially as set forth, of a permanent magnet or other body capable of inductive action, with a closed circuit, so that the vibration of the one shall occasion electrical undulations in the other, or in itself, and this I claim, whether the permanent magnet beset in vibration in the neighborhood of the conducting-wire forming the circuit, or whether the conducting-wire be set in vibration in the neighborhood of the permanent magnet, or whether the conducting - wire and the permanent magnet both simultaneously be set in vibration in each other's neighborhood”), and three method claims. The text of this patent, including images of the figures, is available at the mindfully.org link below. “The Telephone Gambit: Chasing Alexander Graham Bell's Secret” will be released on January 8, 2008.

Yahoo! News Article: LINK
Amazon.com Book Entry: LINK
U.S. Patent No. 174,465: LINK

It was recently announced that a joint effort between the USPTO and the Japanese Patent Office (JPO), the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH), will soon be implemented on a full-time basis. The PPH effort began in July, 2006, as an initial feasibility study, and after noted successes by both office leaders, the program is scheduled to go full-time on January 4, 2008, one day after the initial part-time trial is scheduled to end. According to Jon Dudas, the Director of the USPTO, “The pilot project shows that the Patent Prosecution Highway offers significant potential for our offices to make inroads in reducing our backlogs, eliminating redundant work, and examining more efficiently,” and that “[b]y leveraging work done by other offices, the USPTO can make better use of its resources to speed up processing and improve quality.” According to the USPTO announcement (link below), “Implementation of the PPH is a cornerstone of the January 2007 cooperation initiative between the United States Department of Commerce and Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry on enhanced intellectual property rights protection,” and “the initiative calls for the USPTO and the JPO to demonstrate leadership by taking a proactive approach to streamlining practices and procedures under the international patent system to promote expeditious, inexpensive and high-quality patent protection throughout the world.”

USPTO Press Release: LINK
USPTO PPH Webpage: LINK
JPO PPH Webpage: LINK