[Patentpractice] RO/US snail mail (was Snail mail from the USPTO)

[Jeffrey Semprebon]

Gotta love how they acknowledge that their processing may cause weeks of
delay while a 1-month clock to reply (w/o extension) is ticking down. BUT,
still not any problem in their view.


-Jeff

Jeffrey E. Semprebon
Semprebon Patent Services
www.semprebonps.com
72 Myrtle Street
Claremont, New Hampshire 03743

On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 5:32 PM Carl Oppedahl via Patentpractice <
patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> On 4/10/2024 2:53 PM, Roger Browdy via Patentpractice wrote:
>
> I very recently was informed the following in a petition decision from the
> PCT Legal Office:
>
>
>
> First, e-Office Action is not available for international applications in
> the international phase. As stated on the e-Office Action web page at
> e-Office Action FAQ #6 "International applications that have not entered
> the national stage in the United States ... are not included in the
> program."  Additionally, FAQ #7 states "Since several areas of the Office
> have independent mailing processes, participants will continue to receive
> paper mailings for communications prepared by the non-participating
> business units, including (but not limited to): The Patent Cooperation
> Treaty Operations Division, International Branch [.]" Scanning of
> international phase documents can lag mailing by weeks, but response times
> are set from mailing. Response periods in the international phase are
> regularly one and two months without extensions of time available.
>
> Thank you Roger for sharing this.
>
> I have two reactions to what you shared.  First, what the USPTO wrote
> seems very close to content-free.  It seems to be saying something along
> the lines of:
>
> You asked why it is that the RO/US only sends paper snail mail instead of
> doing it electronically like the rest of the Patent Office.  The answer is,
> because I said so.
>
> In the EPO, you might ask why it is that ISA/EP does not send out ISR/WOs
> by ordinary email like many other ISAs do.  If you were to ask, the EPO
> person would cite some actual law or rule or something that says in a very
> direct way that EPO is forbidden from using ordinary email for stuff like
> ISR/WOs.  I don't have the cite handy, but it is a real thing.  There is
> actually a reason for it.
>
> I am unaware of any law or rule or anything that somehow forbids the RO/US
> from doing electronic communications or that somehow ties the hands of the
> RO/US to only use paper mail.  So far as I am aware, the situation is that
> if they were to go to the trouble to make it so, they could make it so.
>
> Second, this is all a reminder how good it can be if the practitioner has
> the self-control not to use RO/US at all but instead to use RO/IB.  Yes you
> have to pay attention to your FFL situation.  And you have to keep track of
> what time it is in Geneva.  But one of the many benefits of using RO/IB is
> that you will receive your communications pretty much instantly by email.
> --
> Patentpractice mailing list
> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
>
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240410/293d878a/attachment.html>