<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>This is new Patent Center ticket
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://patentcenter-tickets.oppedahl.com/#CP204">https://patentcenter-tickets.oppedahl.com/#CP204</a> .<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/30/2023 9:03 AM, Carl Oppedahl
via Patentcenter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:5631b3b8-7573-4297-b033-748350eadd77@oppedahl.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>Thank you for posting. This turns out to be a repeat of the
coding blunder that gave us <a
href="https://patentcenter-tickets.oppedahl.com/#CP9"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">https://patentcenter-tickets.oppedahl.com/#CP9</a>
more than three years ago. <br>
</p>
<p>It is astonishing that the Patent Center developers would
repeat this blunder, which they first made in April of 2020.
Back then, it took the developers more than six months to fix
the mistake.</p>
<p>What's going on, of course, is that the coders failed to
actually look at the EFS-Web code. if they had, they could have
copied over the list of patent offices. Instead of using a list
of <i><b>patent offices</b></i>, the coders were lazy and
grabbed some public-domain list of <i><b>countries</b></i>.</p>
<p>The mistake was the the coders assumed that <i><b>patent
offices</b></i> are the same thing as <i><b>countries</b></i>.
Which of course they are not.</p>
<p>But the astonishing thing is that the realization in 2020 by
the coders that patent offices <i><b>are are not the same thing
as </b></i>countries got lost. One assumes that in a mere
three years, there has been complete staff turnover among the
coders. One imagines that nobody on the USPTO team today in
2023 was even around back in 2020 when the USPTO coders read <a
href="https://blog.oppedahl.com/six-months-after-bug-report-uspto-fixes-priority-claim-to-ep-applications-in-patentcenter/"
moz-do-not-send="true">my blog article</a> and realized that
patent offices <i><b>are are not the same thing as </b></i>countries.</p>
<p>Actually the blunder is worse than what I just described. The
coders actually grabbed some public-domain list of <i><b>places
where you can send mail. </b></i>So it includes lots of
places that are not even countries, but are mere protectorates
or territories of other countries.<br>
</p>
<p>The magnitude of this blunder by the USPTO developers is almost
without limit. The drop-down list includes, for example, Wallis
and Fortuna, which does not have a patent office. The drop-down
list includes the Aland Islands, which does not have a patent
office. The drop-down list includes the French Southern
Territories, which does not have a patent office. The drop-down
list includes the Holy See (the Vatican), which does not have a
patent office.</p>
<p>But of course the drop-down list is missing one of the biggest
patent offices in the world, the European Patent Office. And it
is missing ARIPO and OAPI and the Eurasian Patent Office.</p>
<p>Irving, what is the EBC ticket number for this?<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/30/2023 6:45 AM, Irving Fishman
via Patentcenter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:IA0PR02MB912303892A433B3E658BE04AC39CA@IA0PR02MB9123.namprd02.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type"
content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator"
content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style>@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style>
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">In trying to file a third party
submission the blocks to fill in by drop down menus include
a “citation type” which gives you specific selection only,
one of which is “foreign patent document”. On selecting
this, the next screen gives you a required drop down of
“Country code” however, the list does (as of December 19,
2023) not include any of the regional offices (EPO, ARIPO,
or OAPI, etc). EBC only advised that they could “escalate
the question” and were no immediate help even after advising
that I was close to the deadline for filing the particular
third party submission. A supervisor merely shunted me over
to Application Assistance Unit. At least there, people were
sympathetic and went through the various screens and
confirmed I was right, there was no applicable country code
(a required field) for WO or EPO or other regional patent
document, but that there was nothing they could do. I
finally gambled and listed the WO document under “non-patent
literature” and in the citation gave a statement as to why I
listed the document there.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Two days later I spoke to Examiner Tamai
who issues the notices of whether the submission is or is
not compliant and he advised that he would not issue a
“non-compliant” notice under the circumstances described.
This morning (12/30/2023) I went back into the system and it
still does not have any listing under country codes for WO
or EPO or other regional office patent documents, but there
is a listing for “stateless” and a listing for “not
provided”, which are really not applicable. You would think
that in the first instance, the regional offices would be in
the list and that if they could add “stateless” and “not
provided” they could specifically added WO, EPO, and the
other regional offices.</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So when in doubt, stich your reference
citation into the non-patent literature group and explain.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>