<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#0000ff" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<font face="Times New Roman">Your fact pattern was:<br>
Provisional (Prov) filed 2022-03-30<br>
PCT1 filed 2023-03-30, claimed priority to Prov.<br>
PCT2 filed 2024-03-30<br>
<br>
PCT1 claimed Paris priority to Prov. This indicates that Prov was
not withdrawn, abandoned, with no rights outstanding, and
unpublished (the requirements for article 4(c)(4) to reset the
priority period) at the time PCT1 was filed. Consequently, the
priority period could not be reset and therefore the priority
period (that is the time after the first filing for the "same
subject" when you had to file the subsequent application) expired
12 months after the Prov filing date.<br>
Conclusion: for the "same subject" (which is interpreted by
everyone to mean the claimed subject matter for utility patents)
as disclosed in the Prov, PCT2 is not entitled to Paris priority
to PCT1 in any case. PCT1 does not "enjoy" (within the meaning of
Paris Article 4) a right of priority to PCT1 for that "subject."<br>
<br>
See section "VI.L The ROP Period, And The ROP Period Reset Rule"
in </font><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-thickness: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">"</span><a
href="https://www.neifeld.com/pubs/Avoiding%20Failed%20Patent%20Application%20Filings,%202023%20Paper.pdf"
style="color: rgb(51, 51, 51); text-decoration: underline; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Avoiding
Failed Patent Application Filings, 2023 Paper, Submitted for the
NAPP annual meeting July 19, 2023</a><span
style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: left; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; white-space: normal; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); text-decoration-thickness: initial; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">"
Rick Neifeld, July 19, 2023.</span><br>
<font face="Times New Roman"><br>
</font>
<div class="moz-signature">
<p>Best regards, Rick Neifeld, Ph.D., Patent Attorney<br>
Neifeld IP Law PLLC<br>
9112 Shearman Street, Fairfax VA 22032-1479, United States<br>
Office: 1-7034150012<br>
Mobile: 1-7034470727<br>
Fax: 1-5712810045<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:richardneifeld@gmail.com"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">richardneifeld@gmail.com</a><br>
Web: <a href="https://neifeld.com/"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://neifeld.com/</a><br>
This is NOT a confidential communication of counsel. If you are
not the intended recipient, delete this email and notify the
sender that you did so.</p>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/24/2024 4:11 PM, Andrew Berks via
Pct wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAEsYa5GXznLXdMF_wNxR2u3k51b5=su_4DOgmfkpNH-vUAuNog@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><span class="gmail-b-view-panelfield-value"><span></span></span>On
further study, Scott Nielson raises an important point –
whether the Paris Convention Art. 4(C)(4) applies in my
situation (the language he used, “withdrawn, abandoned, or
refused” etc. in is 4(C)(4)). This provision is mandatory if
the elements apply, by the use of the word “shall” (4(C)(4)
text omitted for brevity).<br>
<br>
PC 4(C)(4) serves to further limit the applicability of PC
4(A) – the general provision of the right of priority. The
concern is that if 4(C)(4) applies, then PCT1 cannot serve as
a priority application to PCT2. If that was true, I would lose
2 years of priority (based on my original provisional filing
date).<br>
<br>
In my situation, PCT1 (filed March 30, 2023) has been
withdrawn etc. but *it has served as the basis for a priority
claim* to PCT2 (filed March 29, 2024). So 4(C)(4) *does not
apply.*<br>
<br>
Also I commented a few days ago on PCT Applicant’s Guide 6.009
(which is based on PCT Art. 11(4)): an international
application which fulfills the requirements necessary for it
to be accorded an international filing date [PCT1 meets this
requirement] may be invoked as a priority application even
where the international application is considered withdrawn
under the PCT (for non-payment of fees or other reasons). My
assertion is that the conditions of the PC are fulfilled, so
PCT Art. 11(4) also provides a basis for a priority to claim
to a withdrawn PCT that was otherwise properly filed.<br>
<br>
Conclusion: PCT1 is a valid priority application for PCT2.<br>
<br>
There is also the question (that Scott and others have raised)
that PCT1 has an RO101 listing a provisional filed on March
30, 2022, so the existence of the 2022 provisional will not be
a secret to anyone looking at that RO101. Note I did not
include a Cross Reference paragraph in the specification of
PCT1 so the 2022 provisional will only be known if the RO101
is available.<br>
<br>
However, the *2022 provisional is within the scope of
4(C)(4),* since the provisional was abandoned effective March
31 2023, not laid open, and the attempt of PCT1 to claim
priority to the provisional failed because PCT1 was deemed
withdrawn. There is no valid priority claim based on the 2022
provisional so 4(C)(4) applies, and the "subsequent
application" referred to in 4(C)(4) is PCT1.<br>
<br>
In any event, the provisional is confidential (even the title
is confidential) because provisional patent applications are
confidential unless referred to in a later priority claim
(which isn’t happening here – priority patent applications
(usually provisionals) are not published). So no one else can
access the contents of the 2022 provisional and it cannot be
used for anything even if 4(C)(4) did not apply.<br>
<br>
My goal is to preserve a valid patent application in view of a
patent application that was involuntarily withdrawn by the
USPTO Receiving Office. So worst case here is I lose one year
of priority. Not great but better than losing two years or no
valid patent application at all.<br>
<br>
Thank you all for your helpful comments!<span
class="gmail-b-view-panelfield-value"><span></span></span>
<div>
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#222222"><br>
</font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#222222"><b>Andrew H.
Berks, Ph.D., J.D.</b></font></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><font color="#222222">Partner,
Fresh IP PLC</font></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> <a
href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/andyberks/"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">LinkedIn</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>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, May 23, 2024 at
12:01 PM <<a href="mailto:pct-request@oppedahl-lists.com"
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">Send
Pct mailing list submissions to<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>
<br>
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<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>
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>
<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><br>
<br>
You can reach the person managing the list at<br>
<a href="mailto:pct-owner@oppedahl-lists.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct-owner@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<br>
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more
specific<br>
than "Re: Contents of Pct digest..."<br>
<br>
<br>
Today's Topics:<br>
<br>
1. Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application (Andrew
Berks)<br>
2. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application (Roger
Browdy)<br>
3. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application
(Andrew Berks)<br>
4. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application
(Andrew Berks)<br>
5. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application<br>
(Jeffrey Semprebon)<br>
6. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application (Scott
Nielson)<br>
7. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application (David
Boundy)<br>
8. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application (Scott
Nielson)<br>
9. Re: Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application (Roger
Browdy)<br>
<br>
<br>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 1<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 13:00:27 -0400<br>
From: Andrew Berks <<a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty<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>
Subject: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAEsYa5F=<a
href="mailto:bbxV8cy4UuSeb28_ewxZZOGKfUHRoXYS-O5rozeERw@mail.gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">bbxV8cy4UuSeb28_ewxZZOGKfUHRoXYS-O5rozeERw@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a PCT
application I<br>
filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn" over a
misunderstanding about<br>
fees. After three petitions to resolve this problem, the
USPTO is refusing<br>
to budge, and at this point I am up against the clock with
the 30-month<br>
deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as many
rights as<br>
possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in 2024
claiming priority to<br>
the withdrawn PCT case that was filed one year before.<br>
<br>
Two questions for this list:<br>
1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent application
a "regular<br>
national filing" giving rise to a right of priority?<br>
The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the "withdrawn"
PCT<br>
application. I believe this is a valid priority claim in
view of the Paris<br>
Convention Art. 4, providing that a priority claim can be
made to an<br>
earlier patent application ("a regular national filing")
?whatever may be<br>
the subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern is
that a withdrawn<br>
patent application is no longer a "regular national filing."
I note however<br>
that ePCT found the withdrawn case and allowed the filing to
proceed. I<br>
think the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
<br>
2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue this
fight, either<br>
with additional petitions or suing in the Federal Circuit,
this fight could<br>
easily blow past the 30 month deadline. Is it still possible
to make<br>
national phase filings? I am not aware of any way to toll
this deadline.<br>
<br>
Thanks for any comments.<br>
<br>
<br>
*Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.*<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a>
<a href="http://berksiplaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a>
LinkedIn<br>
<<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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/2955fc59/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/20240522/2955fc59/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 2<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 19:29:40 +0000<br>
From: Roger Browdy <<a
href="mailto:RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com</a>><br>
To: "For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for
laypersons to seek<br>
legal advice." <<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] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:BL0PR14MB3908514994D59655B862171ADCEB2@BL0PR14MB3908.namprd14.prod.outlook.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">BL0PR14MB3908514994D59655B862171ADCEB2@BL0PR14MB3908.namprd14.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
A withdrawn PCT application is as if it has never been
filed. You cannot rely on it for priority or benefit
purposes. You cannot revive it as a US application. This
happened to us recently, unfortunately. A new PCT could
start a new Paris priority period from its date of filing,
but only for content of the original PCT that was not in the
priority or benefit application.<br>
<br>
Roger<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<br>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 1:00 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<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@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
Subject: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT Application<br>
<br>
I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a PCT
application I filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn"
over a misunderstanding about fees. After three petitions to
resolve this problem, the USPTO is refusing to budge, and at
this point I am up against the clock with the 30-month
deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as many
rights as possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in
2024 claiming priority to the withdrawn PCT case that was
filed one year before.<br>
<br>
Two questions for this list:<br>
1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent application
a "regular national filing" giving rise to a right of
priority?<br>
The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the "withdrawn"
PCT application. I believe this is a valid priority claim in
view of the Paris Convention Art. 4, providing that a
priority claim can be made to an earlier patent application
("a regular national filing") ?whatever may be the
subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern is that
a withdrawn patent application is no longer a "regular
national filing." I note however that ePCT found the
withdrawn case and allowed the filing to proceed. I think
the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
<br>
2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue this
fight, either with additional petitions or suing in the
Federal Circuit, this fight could easily blow past the 30
month deadline. Is it still possible to make national phase
filings? I am not aware of any way to toll this deadline.<br>
<br>
Thanks for any comments.<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/2542cf41/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/20240522/2542cf41/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 3<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 15:55:07 -0400<br>
From: Andrew Berks <<a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
To: Roger Browdy <<a
href="mailto:RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com</a>><br>
Cc: "For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for
laypersons to seek<br>
legal advice." <<a
href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>>,
"Andrew H. Berks"<br>
<<a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:CAEsYa5Gvk4BR8GwXYGit%2BuxaSWkzGWkYi9qO3_CW_ua%2BaHd3iw@mail.gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">CAEsYa5Gvk4BR8GwXYGit+uxaSWkzGWkYi9qO3_CW_ua+aHd3iw@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
So what happened when you tried to claim priority to the
withdrawn PCT<br>
application? If what you say is correct, I don't understand
is why ePCT let<br>
me add the withdrawn case to the RO101 of the new case.<br>
<br>
<br>
*Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.*<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a>
<a href="http://berksiplaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a>
LinkedIn<br>
<<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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 3:30?PM Roger Browdy <<a
href="mailto:RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com</a>><br>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> A withdrawn PCT application is as if it has never been
filed. You cannot<br>
> rely on it for priority or benefit purposes. You
cannot revive it as a US<br>
> application. This happened to us recently,
unfortunately. A new PCT could<br>
> start a new Paris priority period from its date of
filing, but only for<br>
> content of the original PCT that was not in the
priority or benefit<br>
> application.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> Roger<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<br>
> via Pct<br>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 22, 2024 1:00 PM<br>
> *To:* for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<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@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
> *Subject:* [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a
PCT application I<br>
> filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn" over a
misunderstanding about<br>
> fees. After three petitions to resolve this problem,
the USPTO is refusing<br>
> to budge, and at this point I am up against the clock
with the 30-month<br>
> deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as
many rights as<br>
> possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in 2024
claiming priority to<br>
> the withdrawn PCT case that was filed one year before.<br>
><br>
> Two questions for this list:<br>
> 1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent
application a "regular<br>
> national filing" giving rise to a right of priority?<br>
> The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the
"withdrawn" PCT<br>
> application. I believe this is a valid priority claim
in view of the Paris<br>
> Convention Art. 4, providing that a priority claim can
be made to an<br>
> earlier patent application ("a regular national
filing") ?whatever may be<br>
> the subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern
is that a withdrawn<br>
> patent application is no longer a "regular national
filing." I note however<br>
> that ePCT found the withdrawn case and allowed the
filing to proceed. I<br>
> think the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
><br>
> 2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue
this fight, either<br>
> with additional petitions or suing in the Federal
Circuit, this fight could<br>
> easily blow past the 30 month deadline. Is it still
possible to make<br>
> national phase filings? I am not aware of any way to
toll this deadline.<br>
><br>
> Thanks for any comments.<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> *Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.*<br>
><br>
> Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
><br>
> 28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
><br>
> New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
><br>
> Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000,
Reston, VA 20190 USA<br>
> *e:* <a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a> | *w:
*<a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a>
<a href="http://berksiplaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a>
LinkedIn<br>
> <<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>
> *Direct*: +1-845-558-7245<br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/57631e3d/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/20240522/57631e3d/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 4<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 16:54:36 -0400<br>
From: Andrew Berks <<a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty<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>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAEsYa5ELLyYY2mpPOs2scwMk9pnhWHgDj4i3a1d6=<a
href="mailto:6CM7QNMdw@mail.gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">6CM7QNMdw@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Further to my message from earlier today, the remarks from
Roger Browdy<br>
prompted me to dig a little deeper and I found PCT
Applicant's Guide para.<br>
6.009: ... an international application which fulfills the
requirements<br>
necessary for it to be accorded an international filing
date* may be<br>
invoked as a priority application under the Paris
Convention* for the<br>
Protection of Industrial Property (if the conditions laid
down by that<br>
Convention are fulfilled) *even where the international
application is<br>
considered withdrawn* under the PCT (for non-payment of fees
or other<br>
reasons). [Emphasis added]. See also PCT Art. 11(4): Any
international<br>
application fulfilling the requirements listed in items (i)
to (iii) of<br>
paragraph (1) [containing all parts of a patent application]
shall be<br>
equivalent to a regular national filing within the meaning
of the Paris<br>
Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property. This
provision makes<br>
no mention of the effect of withdrawal.<br>
<br>
So I think I am good with a priority claim to a withdrawn
PCT patent<br>
application. This confirms the answer to my question 1 is
"yes."<br>
<br>
This also points up a sneaky poor man's provisional filing -
file a PCT<br>
case and don't pay the fees. If the patent application meets
the<br>
requirements of PCT Art. 11(1) items (i) to (iii), then
under the Paris<br>
Convention, such a case can be used as a priority filing.
However, I will<br>
not recommend doing that.<br>
<br>
Re: my question 2, I see that PCT Art. 48 addresses delays
in meeting time<br>
limits but it does not provide a general excuse where there
is no force<br>
majeure, communications failure, etc. So a dispute with a
receiving office<br>
is still a problem.<br>
<br>
<br>
*Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.*<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a>
<a href="http://berksiplaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a>
LinkedIn<br>
<<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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 1:00?PM Andrew Berks <<a
href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a
PCT application I<br>
> filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn" over a
misunderstanding about<br>
> fees. After three petitions to resolve this problem,
the USPTO is refusing<br>
> to budge, and at this point I am up against the clock
with the 30-month<br>
> deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as
many rights as<br>
> possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in 2024
claiming priority to<br>
> the withdrawn PCT case that was filed one year before.<br>
><br>
> Two questions for this list:<br>
> 1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent
application a "regular<br>
> national filing" giving rise to a right of priority?<br>
> The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the
"withdrawn" PCT<br>
> application. I believe this is a valid priority claim
in view of the Paris<br>
> Convention Art. 4, providing that a priority claim can
be made to an<br>
> earlier patent application ("a regular national
filing") ?whatever may be<br>
> the subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern
is that a withdrawn<br>
> patent application is no longer a "regular national
filing." I note however<br>
> that ePCT found the withdrawn case and allowed the
filing to proceed. I<br>
> think the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
><br>
> 2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue
this fight, either<br>
> with additional petitions or suing in the Federal
Circuit, this fight could<br>
> easily blow past the 30 month deadline. Is it still
possible to make<br>
> national phase filings? I am not aware of any way to
toll this deadline.<br>
><br>
> Thanks for any comments.<br>
><br>
><br>
> *Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.*<br>
><br>
> Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
><br>
> 28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
><br>
> New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
><br>
> Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000,
Reston, VA 20190 USA<br>
> e: <a href="mailto:andrew@freship.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a>
<a href="http://berksiplaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">berksiplaw.com</a>
LinkedIn<br>
> <<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>
> Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/f40a12a5/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/20240522/f40a12a5/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 5<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 17:48:25 -0400<br>
From: Jeffrey Semprebon <<a
href="mailto:jesemprebon@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jesemprebon@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for
laypersons to seek<br>
legal advice." <<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] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAO06Byff5N+=<a
href="mailto:etnieNOtJDknvU97iQB4AR3FwU%2B8kDXWiYdxQQ@mail.gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">etnieNOtJDknvU97iQB4AR3FwU+8kDXWiYdxQQ@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
A couple of quick thoughts which may not be well-based upon
further<br>
consideration (end of a long day):<br>
<br>
Assuming that you're good for Paris Convention, wouldn't
there remain the<br>
issue of lacking co-dependency to rely on the withdrawn PCT
for domestic<br>
benefit when the 2nd PCT is entered into the US National
Phase?<br>
<br>
Timing of the approaching 30-month deadline raises a
question of whether<br>
the withdrawn PCT itself claims benefit of an earlier
application, in which<br>
case the withdrawn PCT would appear likely not the 1st
application filed in<br>
order to qualify for the Paris Convention time limit of
filing w/i one year.<br>
<br>
<br>
-Jeff<br>
<br>
Jeffrey E. Semprebon<br>
Semprebon Patent Services<br>
<a href="http://www.semprebonps.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.semprebonps.com</a><br>
72 Myrtle Street<br>
Claremont, New Hampshire 03743<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/189621fa/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/20240522/189621fa/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 6<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 21:57:05 +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: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty<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>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:SJ0PR11MB6575B76F52367F9EB67EEBE0B0EB2@SJ0PR11MB6575.namprd11.prod.outlook.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">SJ0PR11MB6575B76F52367F9EB67EEBE0B0EB2@SJ0PR11MB6575.namprd11.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Your U.S. application can claim priority to the PCT
application under the Paris Convention, but only if the U.S.
application is filed within 12 months of the filing date of
the PCT application. If the U.S. application is filed more
than 12 months after the PCT application, then you must
claim priority under 35 USC 120, which requires that the
applications be copending?i.e., the PCT application cannot
be abandoned or withdrawn when you file the U.S.
application.<br>
<br>
<br>
Scott Nielson<br>
<br>
801-660-4400<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: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 2:54 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<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@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
<br>
Further to my message from earlier today, the remarks from
Roger Browdy prompted me to dig a little deeper and I found
PCT Applicant's Guide para. 6.009: ... an international
application which fulfills the requirements necessary for it
to be accorded an international filing date may be invoked
as a priority application under the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property (if the conditions laid
down by that Convention are fulfilled) even where the
international application is considered withdrawn under the
PCT (for non-payment of fees or other reasons). [Emphasis
added]. See also PCT Art. 11(4): Any international
application fulfilling the requirements listed in items (i)
to (iii) of paragraph (1) [containing all parts of a patent
application] shall be equivalent to a regular national
filing within the meaning of the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property. This provision makes no
mention of the effect of withdrawal.<br>
<br>
So I think I am good with a priority claim to a withdrawn
PCT patent application. This confirms the answer to my
question 1 is "yes."<br>
<br>
This also points up a sneaky poor man's provisional filing -
file a PCT case and don't pay the fees. If the patent
application meets the requirements of PCT Art. 11(1) items
(i) to (iii), then under the Paris Convention, such a case
can be used as a priority filing. However, I will not
recommend doing that.<br>
<br>
Re: my question 2, I see that PCT Art. 48 addresses delays
in meeting time limits but it does not provide a general
excuse where there is no force majeure, communications
failure, etc. So a dispute with a receiving office is still
a problem.<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 1:00?PM Andrew Berks <<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>>>
wrote:<br>
I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a PCT
application I filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn"
over a misunderstanding about fees. After three petitions to
resolve this problem, the USPTO is refusing to budge, and at
this point I am up against the clock with the 30-month
deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as many
rights as possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in
2024 claiming priority to the withdrawn PCT case that was
filed one year before.<br>
<br>
Two questions for this list:<br>
1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent application
a "regular national filing" giving rise to a right of
priority?<br>
The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the "withdrawn"
PCT application. I believe this is a valid priority claim in
view of the Paris Convention Art. 4, providing that a
priority claim can be made to an earlier patent application
("a regular national filing") ?whatever may be the
subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern is that
a withdrawn patent application is no longer a "regular
national filing." I note however that ePCT found the
withdrawn case and allowed the filing to proceed. I think
the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
<br>
2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue this
fight, either with additional petitions or suing in the
Federal Circuit, this fight could easily blow past the 30
month deadline. Is it still possible to make national phase
filings? I am not aware of any way to toll this deadline.<br>
<br>
Thanks for any comments.<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/01fa465c/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/20240522/01fa465c/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 7<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 18:18:52 -0400<br>
From: David Boundy <<a
href="mailto:DavidBoundyEsq@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">DavidBoundyEsq@gmail.com</a>><br>
To: "For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for
laypersons to seek<br>
legal advice." <<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] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<CAJwugqG9AVa2en_ZDJ0DEdir=<a
href="mailto:wd_6P-n1pvv2e6JObP45tZYUA@mail.gmail.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">wd_6P-n1pvv2e6JObP45tZYUA@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
I am troubled about something in this thread...<br>
<br>
The Paris Convention only applies when you have two
different countries.<br>
Same-country-to-same-country is national law. A PCT
application IS a<br>
national application. So be really cautious here.<br>
<br>
I haven't dug into the fact pattern we have here to be sure
how it comes<br>
out, but some of the reasoning seems questionable to me.<br>
<br>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 5:48?PM Jeffrey Semprebon via Pct
<<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>>
wrote:<br>
<br>
> A couple of quick thoughts which may not be well-based
upon further<br>
> consideration (end of a long day):<br>
><br>
> Assuming that you're good for Paris Convention,
wouldn't there remain the<br>
> issue of lacking co-dependency to rely on the withdrawn
PCT for domestic<br>
> benefit when the 2nd PCT is entered into the US
National Phase?<br>
><br>
> Timing of the approaching 30-month deadline raises a
question of whether<br>
> the withdrawn PCT itself claims benefit of an earlier
application, in which<br>
> case the withdrawn PCT would appear likely not the 1st
application filed in<br>
> order to qualify for the Paris Convention time limit of
filing w/i one year.<br>
><br>
><br>
> -Jeff<br>
><br>
> Jeffrey E. Semprebon<br>
> Semprebon Patent Services<br>
> <a href="http://www.semprebonps.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.semprebonps.com</a><br>
> 72 Myrtle Street<br>
> Claremont, New Hampshire 03743<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>
<br>
<br>
<<a
href="https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy</a>><br>
<br>
*David Boundy *| Partner | Potomac Law Group, PLLC<br>
<br>
P.O. Box 590638, Newton, MA 02459<br>
<br>
Tel (646) 472-9737 | Fax: (202) 318-7707<br>
<br>
*<a href="mailto:dboundy@potomaclaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">dboundy@potomaclaw.com</a>
<<a href="mailto:dboundy@potomaclaw.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">dboundy@potomaclaw.com</a>>*
| *<a href="http://www.potomaclaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.potomaclaw.com</a><br>
<<a href="http://www.potomaclaw.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.potomaclaw.com</a>>*<br>
<br>
Articles at <a href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a>
<<a href="http://ssrn.com/author=2936470"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://ssrn.com/author=2936470</a>><br>
<<a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN</a>?><br>
<br>
Click here to add me to your contacts.<br>
<<a
href="https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN</a>?><br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/fc276d34/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/20240522/fc276d34/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 8<br>
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 22:19:56 +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: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty<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>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:SJ0PR11MB65750A75439E73A64DED9F5AB0EB2@SJ0PR11MB6575.namprd11.prod.outlook.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">SJ0PR11MB65750A75439E73A64DED9F5AB0EB2@SJ0PR11MB6575.namprd11.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
I went back and looked at the earlier email thread about
this issue. Here is the timeline you provided:<br>
Provisional (Prov) filed 2022-03-30<br>
<br>
PCT1 filed 2023-03-30, claimed priority to ("considered
withdrawn")<br>
<br>
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.<br>
PCT2 can claim foreign priority to PCT1. The issue you have
is Paris Convention Article 4, which prohibits PCT1 from
being considered the first application unless certain
conditions are met?i.e., at the time of filing PCT1 the
provisional must have been "withdrawn, abandoned, or
refused, without having been laid open to public inspection
and without leaving any rights outstanding," the provisional
must "not yet served as a basis for claiming a right of
priority," and the provisional "may not thereafter serve as
a basis for claiming a right of priority."<br>
<br>
I cannot see how the fact pattern you provided satisfies
those conditions.<br>
<br>
Also, if you claim foreign priority to PCT1, then you will
need to provide a copy of PCT1 in the file of PCT2, which
means anyone can review PCT1 and see that it claimed
priority to an even earlier provisional application.<br>
<br>
<br>
Scott Nielson<br>
<br>
801-660-4400<br>
<br>
________________________________<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>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 3:57 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<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] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
<br>
Your U.S. application can claim priority to the PCT
application under the Paris Convention, but only if the U.S.
application is filed within 12 months of the filing date of
the PCT application. If the U.S. application is filed more
than 12 months after the PCT application, then you must
claim priority under 35 USC 120, which requires that the
applications be copending?i.e., the PCT application cannot
be abandoned or withdrawn when you file the U.S.
application.<br>
<br>
<br>
Scott Nielson<br>
<br>
801-660-4400<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: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 2:54 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<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@freship.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">andrew@freship.com</a>><br>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
<br>
Further to my message from earlier today, the remarks from
Roger Browdy prompted me to dig a little deeper and I found
PCT Applicant's Guide para. 6.009: ... an international
application which fulfills the requirements necessary for it
to be accorded an international filing date may be invoked
as a priority application under the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property (if the conditions laid
down by that Convention are fulfilled) even where the
international application is considered withdrawn under the
PCT (for non-payment of fees or other reasons). [Emphasis
added]. See also PCT Art. 11(4): Any international
application fulfilling the requirements listed in items (i)
to (iii) of paragraph (1) [containing all parts of a patent
application] shall be equivalent to a regular national
filing within the meaning of the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property. This provision makes no
mention of the effect of withdrawal.<br>
<br>
So I think I am good with a priority claim to a withdrawn
PCT patent application. This confirms the answer to my
question 1 is "yes."<br>
<br>
This also points up a sneaky poor man's provisional filing -
file a PCT case and don't pay the fees. If the patent
application meets the requirements of PCT Art. 11(1) items
(i) to (iii), then under the Paris Convention, such a case
can be used as a priority filing. However, I will not
recommend doing that.<br>
<br>
Re: my question 2, I see that PCT Art. 48 addresses delays
in meeting time limits but it does not provide a general
excuse where there is no force majeure, communications
failure, etc. So a dispute with a receiving office is still
a problem.<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 1:00?PM Andrew Berks <<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>>>
wrote:<br>
I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a PCT
application I filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn"
over a misunderstanding about fees. After three petitions to
resolve this problem, the USPTO is refusing to budge, and at
this point I am up against the clock with the 30-month
deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as many
rights as possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in
2024 claiming priority to the withdrawn PCT case that was
filed one year before.<br>
<br>
Two questions for this list:<br>
1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent application
a "regular national filing" giving rise to a right of
priority?<br>
The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the "withdrawn"
PCT application. I believe this is a valid priority claim in
view of the Paris Convention Art. 4, providing that a
priority claim can be made to an earlier patent application
("a regular national filing") ?whatever may be the
subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern is that
a withdrawn patent application is no longer a "regular
national filing." I note however that ePCT found the
withdrawn case and allowed the filing to proceed. I think
the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
<br>
2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue this
fight, either with additional petitions or suing in the
Federal Circuit, this fight could easily blow past the 30
month deadline. Is it still possible to make national phase
filings? I am not aware of any way to toll this deadline.<br>
<br>
Thanks for any comments.<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240522/18234362/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/20240522/18234362/attachment-0001.htm</a>><br>
<br>
------------------------------<br>
<br>
Message: 9<br>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2024 13:49:26 +0000<br>
From: Roger Browdy <<a
href="mailto:RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">RLBrowdy@browdyneimark.com</a>><br>
To: "For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for
laypersons to seek<br>
legal advice." <<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] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
Message-ID:<br>
<<a
href="mailto:BL0PR14MB3908FB3CCED940C439B7184EDCF42@BL0PR14MB3908.namprd14.prod.outlook.com"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">BL0PR14MB3908FB3CCED940C439B7184EDCF42@BL0PR14MB3908.namprd14.prod.outlook.com</a>><br>
<br>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
<br>
Apparently you can claim priority, but only for the subject
matter of the PCT that was not disclosed in the earlier
priority or benefit application.<br>
<br>
Roger<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 Scott Nielson via Pct<br>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 6:20 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<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: 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>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
<br>
I went back and looked at the earlier email thread about
this issue. Here is the timeline you provided:<br>
Provisional (Prov) filed 2022-03-30<br>
<br>
PCT1 filed 2023-03-30, claimed priority to ("considered
withdrawn")<br>
<br>
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.<br>
PCT2 can claim foreign priority to PCT1. The issue you have
is Paris Convention Article 4, which prohibits PCT1 from
being considered the first application unless certain
conditions are met?i.e., at the time of filing PCT1 the
provisional must have been "withdrawn, abandoned, or
refused, without having been laid open to public inspection
and without leaving any rights outstanding," the provisional
must "not yet served as a basis for claiming a right of
priority," and the provisional "may not thereafter serve as
a basis for claiming a right of priority."<br>
<br>
I cannot see how the fact pattern you provided satisfies
those conditions.<br>
<br>
Also, if you claim foreign priority to PCT1, then you will
need to provide a copy of PCT1 in the file of PCT2, which
means anyone can review PCT1 and see that it claimed
priority to an even earlier provisional application.<br>
<br>
<br>
Scott Nielson<br>
<br>
801-660-4400<br>
<br>
________________________________<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><mailto:<a
href="mailto:scnielson@outlook.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">scnielson@outlook.com</a>>><br>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 3:57 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<a
href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a><mailto:<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] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
<br>
Your U.S. application can claim priority to the PCT
application under the Paris Convention, but only if the U.S.
application is filed within 12 months of the filing date of
the PCT application. If the U.S. application is filed more
than 12 months after the PCT application, then you must
claim priority under 35 USC 120, which requires that the
applications be copending?i.e., the PCT application cannot
be abandoned or withdrawn when you file the U.S.
application.<br>
<br>
<br>
Scott Nielson<br>
<br>
801-660-4400<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><mailto:<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><mailto:<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: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 2:54 PM<br>
To: for users of the Patent Cooperation Treaty <<a
href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a><mailto:<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@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>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Priority Claim to Withdrawn PCT
Application<br>
<br>
Further to my message from earlier today, the remarks from
Roger Browdy prompted me to dig a little deeper and I found
PCT Applicant's Guide para. 6.009: ... an international
application which fulfills the requirements necessary for it
to be accorded an international filing date may be invoked
as a priority application under the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property (if the conditions laid
down by that Convention are fulfilled) even where the
international application is considered withdrawn under the
PCT (for non-payment of fees or other reasons). [Emphasis
added]. See also PCT Art. 11(4): Any international
application fulfilling the requirements listed in items (i)
to (iii) of paragraph (1) [containing all parts of a patent
application] shall be equivalent to a regular national
filing within the meaning of the Paris Convention for the
Protection of Industrial Property. This provision makes no
mention of the effect of withdrawal.<br>
<br>
So I think I am good with a priority claim to a withdrawn
PCT patent application. This confirms the answer to my
question 1 is "yes."<br>
<br>
This also points up a sneaky poor man's provisional filing -
file a PCT case and don't pay the fees. If the patent
application meets the requirements of PCT Art. 11(1) items
(i) to (iii), then under the Paris Convention, such a case
can be used as a priority filing. However, I will not
recommend doing that.<br>
<br>
Re: my question 2, I see that PCT Art. 48 addresses delays
in meeting time limits but it does not provide a general
excuse where there is no force majeure, communications
failure, etc. So a dispute with a receiving office is still
a problem.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
<br>
<br>
On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 1:00?PM Andrew Berks <<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>>>
wrote:<br>
I previously posted on this list in Nov. 2023 that a PCT
application I filed at the US RO was declared "withdrawn"
over a misunderstanding about fees. After three petitions to
resolve this problem, the USPTO is refusing to budge, and at
this point I am up against the clock with the 30-month
deadline coming up on Sept. 30, 2024. In order keep as many
rights as possible, I filed a new PCT patent application in
2024 claiming priority to the withdrawn PCT case that was
filed one year before.<br>
<br>
Two questions for this list:<br>
1. Valid priority claim - is a withdrawn patent application
a "regular national filing" giving rise to a right of
priority?<br>
The 2024 PCT application claims priority to the "withdrawn"
PCT application. I believe this is a valid priority claim in
view of the Paris Convention Art. 4, providing that a
priority claim can be made to an earlier patent application
("a regular national filing") ?whatever may be the
subsequent fate of the application.? So the concern is that
a withdrawn patent application is no longer a "regular
national filing." I note however that ePCT found the
withdrawn case and allowed the filing to proceed. I think
the answer to my question above is "yes."<br>
<br>
2. Can the 30-month deadline be tolled? If I continue this
fight, either with additional petitions or suing in the
Federal Circuit, this fight could easily blow past the 30
month deadline. Is it still possible to make national phase
filings? I am not aware of any way to toll this deadline.<br>
<br>
Thanks for any comments.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
Andrew H. Berks, Ph.D., J.D.<br>
<br>
Partner, Fresh IP PLC<br>
<br>
28 Liberty St 6th Fl<br>
<br>
New York NY 10005 (US)<br>
<br>
Main office: 11710 Plaza America Drive, Suite 2000, Reston,
VA 20190 USA<br>
e: <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>>
| w: <a href="http://www.freship.com" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true">www.freship.com</a><<a
href="http://www.freship.com/" rel="noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">http://www.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>
Direct: +1-845-558-7245<br>
-------------- next part --------------<br>
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>
URL: <<a
href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240523/21b6195f/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/20240523/21b6195f/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 7, Issue 7<br>
*********************************<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>