[Patentpractice] Revival of provisional application?

Fri Jun 6 02:34:50 UTC 2025

(FYI, " The Office cannot provide or certify copies of an application
that has been disposed of."  1.59(b); bold added.)
Rick


On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 10:22 PM Rick Neifeld <richardneifeld at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> David - How do you expect to rely upon the provisional for either the certified copy for Paris or content of the provision for US benefit, if the USPTO "disposed of" the application pursuant to 1.53(g)? Rick
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 5:43 PM David Boundy via Patentpractice <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>>
>> I disagree in part with Roger.
>>
>> For countries other than the U.S., Paris Convention Art 4 says you can make the priority claim "whatever may be the subsequent fate of the application."
>>
>> But for a U.S. daughter, Paris doesn't apply.  You have to meet the requirements of  § 120, including that the daughter must be "filed before the patenting or abandonment of or termination of proceedings on the first application."
>>
>> I'm a bit confused about this one.     § 119(e)(2) says you can't rely on the provisional unless the fees are paid --- but the reference to § 41(a)(1)(A) or (C) -- I don't understand that.  They're nonprovisional and plant patent.)
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2025 at 4:27 PM Roger Browdy via Patentpractice <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I don’t understand why you need to revive at all.  It received a filing date.  Was a basic fee paid that is required for retention?  A provisional does not have to be alive when a PCT or non-provisional is filed.  Why revive at all?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Roger L. Browdy
>>>
>>> Partner
>>>
>>> _____________________________________________
>>>
>>> FisherBroyles, LLP
>>>
>>> direct: +1 202-277-5198
>>>
>>> roger.browdy at fisherbroyles.com
>>>
>>> www.fisherbroyles.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The information contained in this e-mail message is only for the personal and confidential use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Katherine Koenig via Patentpractice
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2025 10:57 AM
>>> To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
>>> Cc: Katherine Koenig <katherine at koenigipworks.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] Revival of provisional application?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Timothy,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for your reply, that’s good news.  One rub is that the AAU representative also told me that the POA I’d filed won’t be processed because the provisional has lapsed (I’ve been told – and have seen – this many times when trying to access provisional applications filed by the client, which I think is so frustrating), so I won’t be able to see the entire filewrapper.   Hopefully the client still has all the documentation he’d received – and he doesn’t have access to the file either!  He thinks he filed as a guest and doesn’t have a USPTO account?  Nothing like untying a knot at the last minute!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Katherine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dr. Katherine Koenig
>>>
>>> Registered Patent Attorney
>>>
>>> Koenig IP Works, PLLC
>>>
>>> 2208 Mariner Dr.
>>>
>>> Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
>>>
>>> (954) 903-1699
>>>
>>> katherine at koenigipworks.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Targeted Intellectual Property Strategy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The information contained in this communication, including any attachments, is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, do not read it.  Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then destroy all paper and electronic copies.  Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Patentpractice <patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Timothy Snowden via Patentpractice
>>> Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2025 10:50 AM
>>> To: patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
>>> Cc: Timothy Snowden <tdsnowden at outlook.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] Revival of provisional application?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So if I understand that the prov was filed 6/16/2024, and went abandoned 2/25/2025 due to failure to respond to NTFMP, then you should be able to petition to revive unintentionally abandoned application. I just did the same thing in a self-filed provisional where the ADS had not been signed by all inventors and so was treated as not having been filed. They didn't get the notice, the application went abandoned, and as soon as we discovered it when I got the case we filed petition to revive. PTO form SB0064. Make sure to comb through the file history and also file with the petition a reply to any outstanding requirements. It's less than 2 years, so you only have to state that the delay was unintentional - you don't need a statement.
>>>
>>> On 6/5/2025 9:44 AM, Katherine Koenig via Patentpractice wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We have a utility/foreign filing deadline of 6/16/2025 based on the filing date of a US provisional application (6/16/2025).  The client filed the provisional application himself, and had provided me with the application as filed and the ADS he’d filed.  I’m today learning that he’d received a Notice to File Missing Parts because no certification statement for his micro-entity status had been filed with the application.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I called the AAU and was told the provisional has been abandoned since 2/25/2025 because the client never replied to the Notice.  I’m aware of petitioning to restore the right of priority to a prior-filed provisional that has naturally expired at the end of the 12-month term, but is there a way to revive a provisional for failure to respond to a Notice?  The AAU representative told me there’s nothing we can do, and I’m not aware of any solution – but hoping someone here has a better answer.  Thank you!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Katherine
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dr. Katherine Koenig
>>>
>>> Registered Patent Attorney
>>>
>>> Koenig IP Works, PLLC
>>>
>>> 2208 Mariner Dr.
>>>
>>> Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
>>>
>>> (954) 903-1699
>>>
>>> katherine at koenigipworks.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Targeted Intellectual Property Strategy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The information contained in this communication, including any attachments, is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.  If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, do not read it.  Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then destroy all paper and electronic copies.  Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Patentpractice mailing list
>>> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
>>> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> David Boundy | Partner | Potomac Law Group, PLLC
>>
>> P.O. Box 590638, Newton, MA  02459
>>
>> Tel (646) 472-9737 | Fax: (202) 318-7707
>>
>> dboundy at potomaclaw.com | www.potomaclaw.com
>>
>> Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470
>>
>> Click here to add me to your contacts.
>>
>> --
>> Patentpractice mailing list
>> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
>> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com