<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>This inspired <a
href="https://blog.oppedahl.com/three-years-later-uspto-developers-repeat-a-coding-mistake/">this
blog article</a>.<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/30/2023 9:28 AM, Carl Oppedahl
via Patentcenter wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:e87434b2-9786-41b5-b088-b5ae04d6b5dd@oppedahl.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p>This is new Patent Center ticket <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://patentcenter-tickets.oppedahl.com/#CP204"
moz-do-not-send="true">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>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>