<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>What he asked. Sometimes you get the US practitioner whose
client is located in (say) Canada and the US practitioner hopes
very much to collect the money that would normally get paid to
Canadian patent counsel, so the US practitioner tries to tough it
out and make use of RO/US even though RO/US is not "competent" to
be a Receiving Office for that Canadian company.</p>
<p>If the US practitioner were using ePCT to generate the Request
and zip file, then the US practitioner would get spanked for
trying to do this, and would not be able to proceed. The US
practitioner would then eventually muddle through things and would
find that the US practitioner can file in RO/IB (the cost being
that the US practitioner is demoted from "agent" status and gets
moved down to mere "address for correspondence" status).</p>
<p>Of course to make this work, the US practitioner needs to have
planned ahead and done whatever is needed so far as FFLs are
concerned. But if the invention was not made in the US, then
there is no need to worry about FFLs. If the client is Canadian,
then it might work out that the invention was not made in the US.</p>
<p>To add to Paul's question. I wonder if the original poster did
use ePCT to generate the Request and the zip file?<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/27/2023 4:04 PM, McBean, Paul via
Pct wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:PH7PR01MB8514396F6E8F23C50DD8DB48A2BDA@PH7PR01MB8514.prod.exchangelabs.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator"
content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]-->
<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;}@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}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;}span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">With regard to the “inventors as
applicants” change, is it possible that they were made
applicants because your original applicant (whoever that is)
cannot be an applicant for all designated states (they are
ineligible to be an applicant in the US and file at the
RO/US)? I think the USPTO would reject your POA at that point
since the inventors (now applicant / inventors) have not (I
assume) signed the POA.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Paul<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div
style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b>From:</b>
Pct <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pct-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com"><pct-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com></a>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Timothy Snowden via Pct<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, November 27, 2023 5:50 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Russell Nugent via Pct
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com"><pct@oppedahl-lists.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Timothy Snowden
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:timothy@thompsonpatentlaw.com"><timothy@thompsonpatentlaw.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Pct] Ex Officio Changes to the
Request form<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">Re: #3 on
drawings -- I usually politely point out that the USPTO
downgraded the drawings, and that we are re-submitting them
for convenience sake. You can submit the repsonse via ePCT
to avoid USPTO image damage again. I've never had that
response rejected.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in">On 11/27/2023
4:26 PM, Russell Nugent via Pct wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black">Dear
Group,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black">I
filed a PCT application in the USPTO (client's decision
not mine) and I have gotten some confusing
correspondence back. The USPTO made ex officio changes
that I can object to. The first change was that all of
the inventors that were listed as Inventors only have
been changed to inventors and applicants. Can anyone
think of a reason they would decide on their own end
that the inventors are applicants too?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black">They
then rejected my POA as not being signed by all of the
applicants. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black">In
addition, what is the current thinking/solution to the
images being degraded by the USPTO. They objected to
the drawings as not being clear, and the drawings that I
downloaded from Patent Center are of poor quality.
Resubmitting the drawings that are good quality will
presumably not fix this issue. Suggestions and advice
please (other than to file in WIPO next time)?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div id="Signature">
<div>
<p style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#242424">Thanks, </span><span
style="font-size:12.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;color:#242424">RUSSELL D.
NUGENT</span></b><span
style="font-size:12.0pt;color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><i><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424">Attorney at
law</span></i><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><img
style="width:2.0902in;height:.6875in"
id="_x0000_i1025"
src="https://ci3.googleusercontent.com/mail-sig/AIorK4z7V6pBMuo7rYSvB8jx6VK4e64t-N1CYJNO168MTVtDkfLnUZEWARq79Wr9lpxYzkJoMhRhRbc"
moz-do-not-send="true" width="201" height="66"></span><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424">1904
Eastwood Road, Suite 310A</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><b><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424">Wilmington,
NC 28403</span></b><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424">(p)
910.899.0236 | (f) 888.290.7817<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><u><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#954F72"><a
href="http://www.humphriesfirm.law"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><span
style="color:#954F72">http://www.humphriesfirm.law</span></a></span></u><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><span
style="font-size:11.5pt;color:#242424;background:white">CONFIDENTIALITY
NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments constitute
privileged and confidential attorney-client
communication, and/or confidential proprietary
and/or trade secret information intended for the
addressee only. This e-mail and any attachments are
covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy
Act, 18 USC §§ 2510-2521, and are legally
privileged. Unauthorized review, use, disclosure,
distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. The
information contained in the e-mail and any
attachments is intended only for the personal use of
the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the
intended recipient you are notified that use,
disclosure, distribution or copying is prohibited.
If you receive this e-mail in error, notify the
sender at (910) 332-0721 or by reply e-mail and
destroy the original and all copies of this e-mail
and all attachments immediately without reading or
saving in any manner.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.5in"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission with any attachments may
constitute an attorney-client communication, protected health
information (PHI) or other confidential information that is in
fact confidential, legally protected from disclosure and/or
protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are the
intended recipient, please maintain confidentiality and be aware
that forwarding this e-mail to others may result in a waiver of
these protections and privileges and regardless electronic
communications may be at times illegally accessed and viewed. If
you are not the intended recipient, this e-mail is not intended
for transmission to you, nor to be read, reviewed, used,
distributed or even received by you or any other unauthorized
persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in
error, please double delete it from your system immediately
without copying, reading or disseminating it, and notify the
sender by reply e-mail, so that our address record can be
corrected. Thank you very much.
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>