[Patentpractice] USPTO welcome letters

[pbrisky at fujitsu.com]

It seems like a lot of their processes, systems and procedures have been "simplified" for the sake of the inexperienced individual inventor.  I don't have the data to support my assumption but I would imagine that demographic is a small part of the filing volume and, is most certainly, a very small part of the agency's revenue.  So, what consultant is telling them to make these changes and why?  They need better consultants.


Pamela Cei Brisky
Senior Patent Paralegal/Docketing Manager
Fujitsu North America, Inc.
Fujitsu Intellectual Property Center 

571-216-2112
pbrisky at fujitsu.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Suzannah K. Sundby via Patentpractice
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2024 7:21 AM
To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Suzannah K. Sundby <suzannah at canadylortz.com>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] USPTO welcome letters

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

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