<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>This is discussed at some length in Lecture 8 at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://blog.oppedahl.com/the-2022-schwegman-advanced-pct-training/">https://blog.oppedahl.com/the-2022-schwegman-advanced-pct-training/</a>
.</p>
<p>Reason 1 that I talked about in that lecture ...<br>
</p>
<p>Suppose you want to collect pre-grant damages. Well, the
pre-grant damages are predicated on the content of your published
claims. To collect the pre-grant damages, among other things it
has to work out that the conduct of the infringer is covered by
the published claims.</p>
<p>So now let's imagine you filed a PCT application. And the ISR/WO
shows up and you realize that the claims as filed are not the
claims you will later be asserting against infringers. Then an
Article 19 amendment is the perfect way to arrange for publication
of the claims that you will later be asserting against
infringers. And you will be able to collect your pre-grant
damages based on the Article 19 claims.<br>
</p>
<p>Reason 2 that I talked about in that lecture ...</p>
<p>You realize, after you filed your PCT application, that there is
some claim amendment that you want to make that is going to be
appropriate in every place where you are going to enter the
national phase. Maybe this is because you now realize you
misspelled a word. Or you now realize that to overcome some
anticipatory reference there is just no choice you need to roll
claim 2 up into claim 1. Anyway, I am supposing that whatever the
amendment is, it is going to be the same in every place where you
are going to enter the national phase. Say EPO, KIPO, JPO,
CNIPA, and USPTO.</p>
<p>Well, you can treat Article 19 as noise. In that case, you will
be doing that amendment in EPO, KIPO, JPO and CNIPA after having
entered the national phase in those four places. And you will be
sending $1000 to local counsel in each of those four places to
carry out the amendments.<br>
</p>
<p>Or you can use Article 19. And you have just saved $4000.<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/22/2024 4:17 PM, David Boundy via
Pct wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJwugqHKSxxg4afifHM-fsUzqOHiFQo_5b0ShXUNJWZ0=VWmRw@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Article 19 Amendments were useful long ago. But since the
PCT changed the default about 10-15 years ago so that 30
months was the default, instead of only by paid Chapter II, I
can't remember seeing any use for an Article 19 Amendment.
Article 34, yes. Article 19, no.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Am I missing something? Or have Article 19 Amendments
become noise that I ought to get off my docket?<br>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"
data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><span>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>David<br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr"><font
size="1"><span
style="line-height:150%;font-family:"Times New Roman""></span></font></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span><span><span
style="font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:black"></span></span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>