<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Thank you Andrew for posting (twice!).<br>
</p>
<p>Yes I see from <a
href="https://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/private/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/">the
listserv archives</a> that your most recent successful posting
to the PCT listserv (until today) was on November 19.</p>
<p>I went into the delivery tracking system to look for the most
recent three times that <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:andrew@berksiplaw.com">"andrew@berksiplaw.com"</a> tried to send
email to <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com">"pct@oppedahl-lists.com"</a>. The delivery tracking system
lists these dates and times: <br>
</p>
<ul>
<li>Nov 22, 2023, 7:31:07 AM</li>
<li>Nov 19, 2023, 5:01:17 PM</li>
<li>Nov 17, 2023, 7:57:19 PM</li>
</ul>
<p>The delivery tracking system does not show any attempt on
November 20. Normally if somebody tries to post and is turned
away, there will be a "bounce" event in the delivery tracking log.</p>
<p>So this is an odd situation that I do not understand.</p>
<p>Carl<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/22/2023 7:30 AM, Andrew Berks via
Pct wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAEsYa5FvLypyYWOuM+Ax9vQSsbwJVxDY=HUFG68hwgEdEhRM+A@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div class="gmail_attr">[Resending - I sent this on Nov. 20
but it does not appear it was posted]</div>
<br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Scott is correct that in my scenario, there was a
provisional (this may have been in an offline
discussion) Here is the timeline:</div>
<div>Provisional (Prov) filed 2022-03-30</div>
<div>PCT1 filed 2023-03-30, claimed priority to
("considered withdrawn")</div>
<div>PCT2 filed 2024-03-30 - not yet filed. The plan is to
treat PCT1 as a priority filing in the event I cannot
revive PCT1. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
Scott argues here 4C4 applies in my case because PCT1
claimed priority to the provisional, so I cannot just swap
out PCT1 as the new "first application" because it has
been withdrawn.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Let me paraphrase 4C4 again using the provisional: A
subsequent application (PCT1) concerning the same
subject as a previous first application (Prov) ... shall
be considered as the first application, of which the
filing date shall be the starting point of the period of
priority, if, at the time of filing the subsequent
application (PCT1), the said previous application (Prov)
has been withdrawn, etc... and if it has not yet served
as a basis for claiming a right of priority. The
previous application (Prov) may not thereafter serve as
a basis for claiming a right of priority.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>When read this way, 4C4 reinforces the concept that a
patent application that was "killed" - withdrawn etc and
not used for a priority claim - can be disregarded and
treated as if it had never been filed. So an applicant
can file a subsequent application on the same subject
matter and start the right of priority clock. This is
something we do all the time - file provisionals and let
them go for one reason or another without fear that the
provisional will surface as prior art.<br>
</div>
<br>
<div>In my case, the subsequent application will be PCT2
and the first application will be PCT1. PCT1 will serve
as a priority application, so 4C4 won't apply. I
understand that I am giving up the provisional
2022-03-30 date here. I am not trying to keep the 2022
date, since that would reach back two years
which exceeds the right of priority which is only one
year. So my PCT2 priority claim will only be to PCT1.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Note also Bodenhausen comports with my analysis.
Bodenhausen says the reason this provision was adopted
at the Lisbon conference in 1958 was because first
patent filings (what we now call provisionals) were
often crude - "the first application may be made in a
hurry ... [and] does not adequately represent the
applicant's intentions. Failing a special provision
regulating this matter the applicant would be unable to
replace his application by a better one without losing
the right of priority, because the said application
would not be the first concerning the same subject."
(Bodenhsausen p. 45 note b).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>An argument that could get me into trouble is that if
a person was to look at the RO101 of PCT1 - it that was
even made available to the public in a withdrawn PCT
case (note I did not add a reference to previously filed
cases in the first paragraph of PCT1) - you could argue
that PCT1 was not the first filing, in which case Prov
will be prior art. But keep in mind also that
provisionals remain confidential unless they are the
basis of a priority claim, and my view is that the
original priority claim of PCT1 is void if PCT1 is
withdrawn. </div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr"><span>
<div dir="ltr" style="margin-left:0pt"
align="left">
<table
style="border:none;border-collapse:collapse">
<colgroup><col width="136"><col width="488"></colgroup><tbody>
<tr style="height:0pt">
<td
style="vertical-align:top;padding:5pt;overflow:hidden">
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.2;margin-top:10pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"><span
style="border:none;display:inline-block;overflow:hidden;width:125px;height:96px"></span></span></p>
<br>
</td>
<td
style="vertical-align:top;padding:5pt;overflow:hidden"><br>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.2;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;font-weight:700;vertical-align:baseline">Andrew
Berks, Ph.D., J.D.</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,121,172);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">
</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;font-weight:700;vertical-align:baseline">|
Partner</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.39091;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;font-weight:700;vertical-align:baseline">Patent
Attorney and IP Licensing</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.39091;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">FRESH</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(68,68,68);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">
</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(36,36,36);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">IP
PLC</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(68,68,68);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"> </span></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.39091;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(68,68,68);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">28
Liberty St 6th Fl</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.39091;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">New
York NY 10005 (US)</span></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.39091;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">Main
office: 11710 Plaza America Drive,
Suite 2000, Reston, VA 20190 USA</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"><br>
</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;font-weight:700;vertical-align:baseline">e:</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">
</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(5,99,193);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline"><a
href="mailto:andrew@freship.com"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a></span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(68,68,68);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">
| </span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(0,0,0);background-color:transparent;font-weight:700;vertical-align:baseline">w:
</span><a
href="http://www.freship.com/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(17,85,204);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">www.freship.com</span></a> <a
href="https://berksiplaw.com/"
target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a></p>
<p dir="ltr"
style="line-height:1.39091;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt"><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(36,36,36);background-color:transparent;font-weight:700;vertical-align:baseline">Direct</span><span
style="font-size:10pt;font-family:Arial;color:rgb(36,36,36);background-color:transparent;vertical-align:baseline">:
+1-845-558-7245</span></p>
<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at
11:01 AM <<a
href="mailto:pct-request@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct-request@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"><br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 00:56:25 +0000<br>
From: Scott Nielson <<a
href="mailto:scnielson@outlook.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">scnielson@outlook.com</a>><br>
To: "<a href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>"
<<a href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Paris Convention Art. 4(C)(4)<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:SJ0PR11MB65751576B3C1C0981095B0C9B0B4A@SJ0PR11MB6575.namprd11.prod.outlook.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">SJ0PR11MB65751576B3C1C0981095B0C9B0B4A@SJ0PR11MB6575.namprd11.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"<br>
<br>
My apologies. I inadvertently sent the previous email
before it was complete (using a different keyboard)<br>
<br>
In the scenario you described previously, there were
three applications you were considering: (1) US
Provisional (filed, now expired), (2) PCT1 (filed,
claims priority to US Prov; current status is
withdrawn), and (3) PCT2 (filing status unknown but
would be filed within one year of PCT1, claim foreign
priority to PCT 1).<br>
<br>
The Paris Convention allows you to claim priority to the
"first application" if the subsequent application is
filed within a year of the first application. The
problem you have is that the first application is the US
provisional and it is more than since it was filed.<br>
<br>
Article 4 allows you to change the first application to
a later application but only if the applicable
conditions are satisfied?i.e., the original first
application (the US provisional) is abandoned,
withdrawn, etc. without having served as the basis of a
priority claim. Unfortunately, this is not applicable in
this case because PCT1 claimed priority to the US
provisional. You cannot just swap out PCT1 as the new
"first application" because it has been withdrawn.<br>
<br>
<br>
Scott Nielson<br>
<br>
801-660-4400<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
________________________________<br>
From: Pct <<a
href="mailto:pct-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>
on behalf of Andrew Berks via Pct <<a
href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2023 5:00 PM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>
<<a href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
Cc: Andrew Berks <<a
href="mailto:andrew@berksiplaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@berksiplaw.com</a>><br>
Subject: [Pct] Paris Convention Art. 4(C)(4)<br>
<br>
This provision of the Paris Convention (PC) was recently
pointed out to me, because I had a situation where I
filed a PCT application (PCT1) that was withdrawn
involuntarily (the details are irrelevant to this
discussion). A potential way to recover from this
situation would be to file a second PCT application
(PCT2) on the anniversary of the PCT1 filing date.<br>
<br>
This should be a good plan under the PC Art. 4(A)<<a
href="https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/288514#P83_6610"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text/288514#P83_6610</a>>:
its a duly filed regular national patent application,
and it should give me a right to priority "whatever may
be the subsequent fate of the application" (which in my
case, PCT1 was withdrawn).<br>
<br>
But Art. 4(C)(4) seems to directly contradict this:
4(C)(4) states that a subsequent application (here PCT2)
shall be considered as the first application, of which
the filing date shall be the starting point of the
period of priority, if, at the time of filing the
subsequent application, the previous application (here
PCT1) has been withdrawn, abandoned, or refused, without
having been laid open to public inspection and without
leaving any rights outstanding. The previous application
may not thereafter serve as a basis for claiming a right
of priority. (paraphrased slightly and emphasis added).<br>
<br>
The use of the word "shall" in 4(C)(4) seems to directly
contradict 4(A). Bodenhausen states that the phrase in
4(A)(3) "whatever may be the subsequent fate of the
application" means the right of priority subsists when
the first application is withdrawn, abandoned or
rejected - which is what happened to PCT1.<br>
<br>
So a plain reading of 4(C)(4) seems to mean that PCT2
cannot in any circumstance (use of the word "shall")
claim priority to PCT1 if PCT1 is withdrawn, abandoned
or rejected. So what happened to the "subsequent fate"
language?<br>
<br>
The only solution that makes sense here is that 4(C)(4)
is optional. That means that a PCT2 can optionally
disregard a PCT1 if the conditions of being withdrawn,
etc. are met, because PCT1 is a dead patent application,
but PCT2 can still claim priority to PCT1, regardless of
the subsequent fate of PCT1, if the applicant so
chooses.<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
New York, New York 10004 (US)<br>
<br>
<a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a><mailto:<a
href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
<br>
Voice/text: +1-845-558-7245<br>
<br>
Toll free: +1-866-913-3499<br>
<br>
Mailing address: 11710 Plaza America Drive Suite 2000,
Reston, VA 20190 (US)<br>
<br>
<a href="http://freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">freship.com</a><<a
href="https://freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://freship.com/</a>>,
<a href="http://berksiplaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a><<a
href="https://berksiplaw.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://berksiplaw.com/</a>>
LinkedIn <<a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/andyberks/"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.linkedin.com/in/andyberks/</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231120/b34cef81/attachment-0001.htm"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20231120/b34cef81/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Subject: Digest Footer<br>
<br>
Pct mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
End of Pct Digest, Vol 1, Issue 8<br>
*********************************<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>