<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<blockquote style="margin-left: 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex; border-left: 3px solid rgb(200, 200, 200);">
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Segoe UI Web (West European)", "Segoe UI", -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, Roboto, "Helvetica Neue", sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Indeed if you were to do a bypass continuation, it would not even be necessary to throw money at it. Present the priority claim promptly with the bypass and Bob's your uncle.</span></div>
</blockquote>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I think this needs to be clarified a bit. The original poster used the term "priority claim" to refer to a domestic benefit claim to a U.S. provisional. It's important to recognize that a PCT application missing a priority claim to a foreign application and
a PCT application missing a domestic benefit claim to a U.S. application are treated very differently for purposes of the U.S. </div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
What Carl wrote is true for priority claims to non-U.S. patent applications in the sense that MPEP 214 allows you to fix the problem by filing a bypass continuation instead of a national phase. However, be aware, that MPEP 214 rests on shaky ground. The only
court to consider this issue is the district court in <i>Medtronic CoreValve v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp.</i>, Case No. 11-CV-0961 (CD Cal. 13 Nov 2012). It held that foreign priority must be claimed in the PCT application so filing a bypass continuation
cannot fix the problem (the Fed. Cir. Affirmed the district court on other grounds).</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
So, yes, the USPTO will let you fix a priority claim to a foreign application by filing a bypass continuation. However, there is a significant risk that the priority claim will be found defective later in litigation.</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
On the other hand, in the case presented by the original poster, the PCT application claims domestic benefit to a U.S. provisional. There is no ambiguity in this situation. The domestic benefit claim cannot be fixed by filing a bypass continuation. The Federal
Circuit made this clear in <i>Medtronic CoreValve v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp.</i>, 741 F. 3d 1359 (Fed Cir 2014) and
<i>Natural Alternatives International, Inc. v. Iancu</i>, 904 F. 3d 1375 (Fed Cir 2018). The only way to fix a domestic benefit claim such as this is to file a national phase application with the petition and expensive fees.</div>
<div class="elementToProof" style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div class="elementToProof" id="Signature">
<p style="margin: 0in; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; color: rgb(31, 56, 100);"><b>Scott Nielson</b></span></p>
<p style="margin: 0in; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt;"><span style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; color: black;">801-660-4400</span></p>
</div>
<div id="appendonsend"></div>
<div style="font-family: "Aptos Serif", Aptos_EmbeddedFont, Aptos_MSFontService, serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<hr style="display: inline-block; width: 98%;">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: Calibri, sans-serif; font-size: 11pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><b>From:</b> Pct <pct-bounces@oppedahl-lists.com> on behalf of Carl Oppedahl via Pct <pct@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, March 4, 2025 2:56 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <pct@oppedahl-lists.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Carl Oppedahl <carl@oppedahl.com><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Pct] consequences of missing the dreaded 4-and-16 date?</span>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>On 3/4/2025 2:47 PM, Carl Oppedahl via Pct wrote:</div>
<blockquote>
<p>A listserv member asks to post anonymously:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>A PCT filed 2/1/24 was based on a provisional filed 2/1/23. The spec had the correct priority claim but the PCT Request form did not include the priority claim at all.</p>
<p>I interpret Rule 26<i>bis</i> as being very clear that you have 16 months from the priority date to correct a priority claim. I believe that priority cannot be fixed for the PCT.</p>
<p>Correct or incorrect?</p>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<p>Part of the answer is tied to the particular Office or Offices where the applicant chooses to enter the national phase.</p>
<p>For example if you were to enter the US national phase, this lapse would be fixable by throwing money at it and filing a petition.</p>
<p class="elementToProof">Indeed if you were to do a bypass continuation, it would not even be necessary to throw money at it. Present the priority claim promptly with the bypass and Bob's your uncle.</p>
<p>But yes there are many Offices around the world in which, if the priority claim had not been presented by June 1, 2024, it would be too bad so sad.</p>
</body>
</html>