[Patentpractice] "Good and Sufficient Cause"

[Suzannah K. Sundby]

Re: Trusting Govt Officials about what they say…

Ha.  “Low” is a relative word.  Besides, way back when, the standard for suspending prosecution for 6 months was low… until someone at the USPTO woke up one day and decided that they were not going to grant petitions for suspension of action in all but super rare situations… and so it seems no reason is good and sufficient for getting a 6 month suspension of action granted.

This is why I continue to this day to submit interim priority documents because I don’t trust the Govt… and the USPTO has become an anti-patent regime.

Suzannah K. Sundby<http://www.linkedin.com/in/ssundby/> | Partner
canady + lortz LLP<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
1050 30th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20007
T: 202.486.8020
F: 202.540.8020
suzannah at canadylortz.com<mailto:suzannah at canadylortz.com>
www.canadylortz.com<http://www.canadylortz.com/>
Confidentiality Notice:  This message is being sent by or on behalf of a lawyer.  It is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed.  This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged or confidential, or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure.  If you are not the named addressee, you may not read, print, retain, copy, or disseminate this message or any part.  If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete all copies of the message.

From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Watt, Rachel S. via Patentpractice
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 4:54 PM
To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Watt, Rachel S. <Rwatt at hodgsonruss.com>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] "Good and Sufficient Cause"

I’m very interested in the answer to this as I have been unable to find the USPTO’s definition of the phrase. I’ve been told by the PTO that the standard is quite low. But how low, and is it subjective to each Petitions Examiner?

I’ve personally seen petitions granted where a paper certified copy was unable to be filed because a patent office was not issuing them during/since covid.

From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of Roger Browdy via Patentpractice
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 4:08 PM
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: Roger Browdy <RLBrowdy at browdyneimark.com<mailto:RLBrowdy at browdyneimark.com>>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] "Good and Sufficient Cause"

External Email - Use Caution

________________________________
Does anyone know of or have access to any petition decisions that define “good and sufficient cause” for delay, for example, in filing of a certified priority document?  Or at least examples of what the Petitions Office is accepting as good and sufficient cause?  Thank you very much in advance.

Roger

    This message may contain confidential information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege or otherwise. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, or use of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If this message has been received by you in error, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240502/49ec3271/attachment.html>