[Patentpractice] Large Tables ASCII Format; Objecting to Post Allowance Drawing Correction Requirement

[Suzannah K. Sundby]

Not I… we conceded and submitted large ASCII tables.

I think the risk is too great to try to push back bc what happens if the USPTO maintains the requirement and after allowance, with the shortened time frame and only a 2 month extension available… will the USPTO even send a notice back saying sorry, we are still maintaining the objection so you know you still need to reply or else the case goes abandoned… and you lose all your PTA if you have to revive, etc.?

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 Roger Browdy via Patentpractice
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2025 9:32 AM
To: For patent practitioners. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: Roger Browdy <Roger.Browdy at FisherBroyles.com>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] Large Tables ASCII Format; Objecting to Post Allowance Drawing Correction Requirement

The below posting has a very interesting reference to MPEP 1893.03(f), which says that the USPTO may not impose drawing requirements during examination of a national stage appln beyond those imposed by the PCT.  My question is, has anyone objected to a Notice to file Corrected Application Papers after allowance asking that the Notice be withdrawn on this grounds?  I am interested in the success rate for such an argument.

Roger L. Browdy
Partner
_____________________________________________
FisherBroyles, LLP
direct: +1 202-277-5198
roger.browdy at fisherbroyles.com<mailto:roger.browdy at fisherbroyles.com>
www.fisherbroyles.com<http://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<mailto:patentpractice-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> On Behalf Of Carl Oppedahl via Patentpractice
Sent: Monday, June 2, 2025 3:11 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: Carl Oppedahl <carl at oppedahl.com<mailto:carl at oppedahl.com>>
Subject: Re: [Patentpractice] Large Tables ASCII Format

On 6/2/2025 12:48 PM, Suzannah K. Sundby via Patentpractice wrote:
Facts:
National Phase application was filed with pages and pages of tables
Application allowed.
Got a Notice to Correct Application Papers because font of Tables too small
Increasing the font size makes the total pages close to 900 pages, which requires 11 ADDITIONAL units of application size fees from what was previously paid.
I have the tables in ASCII format (prepared for a CON).
Question: In response to the Notice, can we amend the specification to delete the embedded tables and provide in ASCII format (by amending the specification to incorporate the ASCII tables)?
I understand extra page fees are calculated as 3 KB = 1 page, which significantly decreases the amount of fees to something like 2 additional units of application size fees.
I called patent publications (waited over an hour), they transferred me to “case resolution team” for post-allowance stuff, who simply said they don’t know.  I thus called OPLA and got no one and hence left a message hours ago.

I wonder if MPEP § 1893.03(f) would be of any help?  Here is what I filed recently in one of my national-phase cases.

Request that Notice to File Corrected Application Papers be withdrawn
The undersigned has now received a Notice to File Corrected Application Papers dated May 28, 2025.
It is signed by <redacted> in the Publication Branch.
The Notice says "The figure label for FIG. 6 is not oriented in the same direction as the figure." The
Notice purports to require that the applicant respond with an amendment to the drawings.
The Publication Branch is requested to comply with MPEP § 1893.03(f) which says:

The USPTO may not impose drawing requirements during the examination of a national stage
application beyond those imposed by the Patent Cooperation Treaty ( e.g., PCT Rule 11).
The present application is a national phase application. It is thus apparent that the Notice to File
Corrected Application Papers was improper.
So as to comply with MPEP § 1893.03(f), the Publication Branch is requested to withdraw the Notice
to File Corrected Application Papers.
Respectfully submitted,

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20251029/56bfda36/attachment.html>