[Patentpractice] "track 1 off" for a non-track 1 case

[Randall Svihla]

Hi, Dan

Where did you see it was a Track 1 case?  I don't see anything in the image file wrapper or the transaction history about a Track 1 being filed or granted.  Plus Track 1 wasn't instituted until 2011 and this application was filed in 2010.

Best regards,

Randall S. Svihla
NSIP Law


From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Dan Feigelson via Patentpractice
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 2:18 AM
Cc: Dan Feigelson <djf at iliplaw.com>; For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] "track 1 off" for a non-track 1 case


That WAS a track 1 case. This one wasn't.

Obviously they've got a default setting: any time an appeal brief is filed, turn off track 1. Even if the case wasn't track 1 to begin with.

But it's a little strange to me how they can turn off something that was never on to begin with.

Sort of like classifying something as a rule 312 amendment when it was filed before the application was allowed, as Rich Straussman reported the other day.



On Thu, Aug 8, 2024 at 9:05 AM Randall Svihla <rsvihla at nsiplaw.com<mailto:rsvihla at nsiplaw.com>> wrote:
Hi, Dan

Here's a link to something including the transaction history of an non-Track 1 application filed in 2010 with an entry "track 1 OFF" in 2016 when an Appeal Brief was filed.

https://schlesingerconrad.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Ex-6-USPTO-1.pdf<https://gcfagjf.r.af.d.sendibt2.com/tr/cl/tSI9HcwlpRx8fWura5xo77waqRKHOFTgyoblSB35UKlQ0-ARQ132_oSS9qJS8yqby9Apk1c9VTXCq6Bf0jbEEv03a9Eg32X1B4nrAmwfUE3wVl__lPysvwZfs3QvFZZrBFO6nIeCI2dt28wzNWd7U0HSLuU4j2pWnXywCtT9K7ACFcgQcim2DneFz_kqSL55Lo23W4LhBo1ffSdi_8vWU9s9xtaDxeDWw8QAFZ0zYRa0MijVvGMlYlD9EWQA_BOXvHTOLjMktzznLSQ8XsWOzo_u3tAne05x-QJrmJDA_fHMSvcRwJ8d4xHYIXdJv8rWDY9N8zFnykZd_mjpxF3fhvrAuWh9XrcmPHD_Jg>

Best regards,

Randall S. Svihla
NSIP Law
Washington, D.C.


From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of Dan Feigelson via Patentpractice
Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2024 1:52 AM
To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: Dan Feigelson <djf at iliplaw.com<mailto:djf at iliplaw.com>>
Subject: [Patentpractice] "track 1 off" for a non-track 1 case


This is from the transaction history for a case of mine. Why "track 1 off"? This wasn't a track 1 case.

[cid:image001.png at 01DAE963.5AC5D680]

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240808/966ba352/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD0003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: ~WRD0003.jpg
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240808/966ba352/attachment.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 18580 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240808/966ba352/attachment.png>