[Patentpractice] USPTO welcome letters

[Suzannah K. Sundby]

The question to be asking is WHY ARE THE LETTERS NEEDED NOW after how many years the USPTO went without.

Seems to go against the Paperwork Reduction Act...

-----Original Message-----
From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Neil R. Ormos via Patentpractice
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 7:07 AM
To: Patent Practice Mailing List <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Neil R. Ormos <ormos-lists at ormos.org>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] USPTO welcome letters

Dan Feigelson wrote:
> Suzannah K. Sundby wrote:

>> Agreed.

>> Imo, the Welcome Letters are Vidal trying to justify herself... "But 
>> we're nice and welcoming... <shows letter>... even if our software 
>> 'improvements' are not user friendly..."

> How difficult would it be for the system to determine if the ADS is 
> signed by a practitioner, and to not send the letter in such a case?

> Too difficult for the PTO, apparently.

The letter mentions that the "Office action includes a 'rejection'".

If the PTO has "business logic" automation that recognizes that the action that triggers the letter includes a rejection, it would seem trivial to also recognize that the applicant is not /pro se/, either from the ADS (as Dan F suggests) or from the presence of a Customer Number in an address field. 

(Am I giving the PTO too much credit?  Do they send Welcome Letter TWO even upon first actions that do not reject any claims?) 

--
Patentpractice mailing list
Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com