<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Ben - Why do you think it is "<span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px">not possible to change the applicant once a provisional patent application ha[s] [sic] expired"? 37 CFR 1.76(c)(1) contains no such limitation.</span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px">"</span><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px">How would one go about changing the applicant for an expired provisional?" - I would review the relevant rules, file a suitable 1.76(c)(2) correction, and inquire with the office of petitions, ebc, and the application assistance unit to see about PTO processing of the correction. I think no petition is required, but I would have to check. In any case, you can expedite processing by petitioning for expedited processing; the PTO always likes it when people file petition fees to speed things along. Good luck.</span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif;font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></div><div dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:14.6667px"><br></span></font><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote gmail_quote_container"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 7:52 PM Benjamin Keim <<a href="mailto:ben@newportip.com">ben@newportip.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"><div class="msg7662120536999742191">
<div lang="EN-US" style="overflow-wrap: break-word;">
<div class="m_7662120536999742191WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Hi Rick,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Thank you for the useful information. You mention correcting both the provisional patent application and the PCT application by naming both the university and the company as
applicants. However, I understand that is not possible to change the applicant once a provisional patent application had expired. How would one go about changing the applicant for an expired provisional?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">-Ben<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:none;border-top:1pt solid rgb(225,225,225);padding:3pt 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11pt;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif"> Rick Neifeld <<a href="mailto:richardneifeld@gmail.com" target="_blank">richardneifeld@gmail.com</a>>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, February 26, 2025 3:16 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <<a href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Benjamin Keim <<a href="mailto:ben@newportip.com" target="_blank">ben@newportip.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Pct] Change of applicant in PCT application --> effect on Paris Art. 4 right of priority<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ben - The existing priority case law is covered in my book, Law Regarding Patents.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You said " the provisional application from which the PCT claims priority has only Company A as the applicant. " .<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You said "I did not know this when originally working on the applications and so filed in the name of Company A." I take that to mean you filed both the provisional and the PCT application naming company A as the applicant.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">"My client and a university did joint research. Their research agreement says the parties shall jointly hold title to all inventions." - This "shall jointly hold title to all inventions." does not use present tense assignment language,
a la Federal Circuit "automatic assignment" law. That sounds like an equittable title agreement, not an assignment. UK courts have spoken to whether the Paris right of priority accrues to equitable title. EPO has refused parol evidence to discount a person
named as an Applicant in a priority application. The EPO concluded that a Paris article 4's "any person" referred to the named applicant of a US provisional application, regardless whether the named applicant had the legal right to effect the provisional application
filing. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The EPO and UK legal conclusions are arguably inconsistent. At least their reasoning regarding parol evidence is at odds. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> "I would prefer just to keep everything in the name of Company A and let them work out a license." - A license would be contrary to the existence of an equitable title.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> "I believe I can change the applicant in the PCT application from Company A to Company<b> </b>A +<b> </b>University B with a rule 92bis request. " - Noted.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">"The research agreement should provide evidence of joint ownership." - The research agreement provides evidence of equitable title. Rule 92bis.1 does not require proof of ownership of a newly named applicant to effect a change adding the
newly named applicant as such.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You did not mention the option that aligns the rights with the facts, which would be to correct both the provisional application and the PCT application by naming both the university and the company as applicants.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">As to your proposal to add the university as an applicant only to the PCT application, See Schaeffler Technologies GmbH & Co. KG v. Porsche AG, T 1933/12 (EPO Board 2/21/2014) ("As far as the board is concerned, Article 87 (1) EPC does
not preclude the (individual) applicant for the first application from sharing his right of priority with a third party by filing an application claiming priority with him," as translated from German.)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 5:23<span style="font-family:Arial,sans-serif"> </span>PM Benjamin Keim via Pct <<a href="mailto:pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border-top:none;border-right:none;border-bottom:none;border-left:1pt solid rgb(204,204,204);padding:0in 0in 0in 6pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I am trying to determine if the applicant can be changed in a pending PCT application without causing a problem with a priority claim to a provisional. I would like the answer to
be "no" to keep things simple.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">My client and a university did joint research. Their research agreement says the parties shall jointly hold title to all inventions. (I have counseled my client about the problems
of joint ownership for US patents.) The research agreement is dated before filing of the provisional application.
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I did not know this when originally working on the applications and so filed in the name of Company A. I would prefer just to keep everything in the name of Company A and let them
work out a license. However, the university may wish to change the applicant on the PCT to also include them.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I believe I can change the applicant in the PCT application from Company A to Company<b>
</b>A +<b> </b>University B with a rule 92bis request. The research agreement should provide evidence of joint ownership.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">However, the provisional application from which the PCT claims priority has only Company A as the applicant. If I change the applicant on the PCT application, it would no longer
be the same as on the provisional. Company A ≠ Company A + University B. This would create a SAOSIT problem between the provisional and the PCT application.
<b>Can this be addressed?</b><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I thought this might be something that can be handled with declaration 3. But the PCT application has passed the 4/16 date and published. The 30-month date is in April. Even if
a declaration could be filed, I am not sure what I would say. Something like: <u></u>
<u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-right:117pt;margin-left:1in">
The provisional application was filed in the name of Company A but at the time of filing the provisional application this invention was actually owned jointly by Company A + University B. So, Company A + University B is the successor in title to Company A because
we should have listed Company A + University B from the beginning.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">My apologies if this is a topic that has been well covered in previous posts.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">-Ben<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b> </b><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
Pct mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Pct@oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">Pct@oppedahl-lists.com</a><br>
<a href="http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com" target="_blank">http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br clear="all">
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span class="m_7662120536999742191gmailsignatureprefix">-- </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Best regards<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Rick Neifeld, J.D., Ph.D. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Neifeld IP Law PLLC<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">9112 Shearman Street, Fairfax VA 22032<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mobile: 7034470727<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Email: <a href="mailto:RichardNeifeld@gmail.com" target="_blank">
RichardNeifeld@gmail.com</a>; <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">This is <span style="font-size:24pt">NOT </span>a confidential and privileged communication. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this email and notify the sender you have done so.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12pt"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div></blockquote></div></div>