<div dir="ltr">Gotta love how they acknowledge that their processing may cause weeks of delay while a 1-month clock to reply (w/o extension) is ticking down. BUT, still not any problem in their view.<div><br></div><div><br></div><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px">-Jeff </span><div><br style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px"><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px">Jeffrey E. Semprebon</span><br style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px"><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px">Semprebon Patent Services</span><br style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px"><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.semprebonps.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204);font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px" target="_blank">www.semprebonps.com</a><br style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px"><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px">72 Myrtle Street</span><br style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px"><span style="font-family:Roboto,Arial,sans-serif;letter-spacing:0.1px">Claremont, New Hampshire 03743</span><br></div></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 5:32\u202fPM Carl Oppedahl via Patentpractice <<a href="mailto:patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com">patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<div>On 4/10/2024 2:53 PM, Roger Browdy via
Patentpractice wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Aptos,sans-serif">I very
recently was informed the following in a petition decision
from the PCT Legal Office:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:Aptos,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:0.5in"><span style="font-family:Aptos,sans-serif">First,
e-Office Action is not available for international
applications in the international phase. As stated on the
e-Office Action web page at e-Office Action FAQ #6
"International applications that have not entered the
national stage in the United States ... are not included in
the program." Additionally, FAQ #7 states "Since several
areas of the Office have independent mailing processes,
participants will continue to receive paper mailings for
communications prepared by the non-participating business
units, including (but not limited to): The Patent
Cooperation Treaty Operations Division, International Branch
[.]" Scanning of international phase documents can lag
mailing by weeks, but response times are set from mailing.
Response periods in the international phase are regularly
one and two months without extensions of time available.</span></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Thank you Roger for sharing this.</p>
<p>I have two reactions to what you shared. First, what the USPTO
wrote seems very close to content-free. It seems to be saying
something along the lines of:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>You asked why it is that the RO/US only sends paper snail mail
instead of doing it electronically like the rest of the Patent
Office. The answer is, because I said so.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In the EPO, you might ask why it is that ISA/EP does not send out
ISR/WOs by ordinary email like many other ISAs do. If you were to
ask, the EPO person would cite some actual law or rule or
something that says in a very direct way that EPO is forbidden
from using ordinary email for stuff like ISR/WOs. I don't have
the cite handy, but it is a real thing. There is actually a
reason for it.</p>
<p>I am unaware of any law or rule or anything that somehow forbids
the RO/US from doing electronic communications or that somehow
ties the hands of the RO/US to only use paper mail. So far as I
am aware, the situation is that if they were to go to the trouble
to make it so, they could make it so. <br>
</p>
<p>Second, this is all a reminder how good it can be if the
practitioner has the self-control not to use RO/US at all but
instead to use RO/IB. Yes you have to pay attention to your FFL
situation. And you have to keep track of what time it is in
Geneva. But one of the many benefits of using RO/IB is that you
will receive your communications pretty much instantly by email.<br>
</p>
</div>
-- <br>
Patentpractice mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Patentpractice@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div>