[Patentpractice] [Pct] Inconsistent name between priority doc and PCT re "The University of X" vs "University of X"

[Dan Feigelson]

Karen, I can't say if there's relevant case law on this, but working from
first principles, it seems to me that if you're only concerned about the
USA, there's no 35 USC 120 governs here, and that section focuses on there
being a common *inventor* between the two applications (in this case, the
the provisional and the PCT), not the named applicant.

" An application for patent for an invention disclosed in the manner
provided by *section 112(a)
<https://mpep.uspto.gov/RDMS/MPEP/current#/current/d0e302824912.html>*
(other than the requirement to disclose the best mode) in an application
previously filed in the United States, or as provided by *section 363
<https://mpep.uspto.gov/RDMS/MPEP/current#/current/d0e306994313.html>*  or *385
<https://mpep.uspto.gov/RDMS/MPEP/current#/current/al_d225a2_27b50_35a.html>*
which names an inventor or joint inventor in the previously filed
application shall have the same effect, as to such invention, as though
filed on the date of the prior application, if filed before the patenting
or abandonment of or termination of proceedings on the first application or
on an application similarly entitled to the benefit of the filing date of
the first application and if it contains or is amended to contain a
specific reference to the earlier filed application. * * *"

So as far as the applicant name goes, I would go with whatever's on the
PCT. If there's still time to get the names aligned on the PCT and
provisional, then do so (as PL suggested), if not, clean up the mess
afterward (as Scott suggests).

Might be a different story outside the USA, but I gather that's not for you
to deal with.


On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 12:34 AM Patent Lawyer via Patentpractice <
patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:

> How close are you to the 30-month deadline?  Do you have 1 day?  Can you
> correct the applicant name tomorrow at WIPO?  (Under 92bis PCT — I am sure
> others will correct me)
>
>
>
> On Sep 25, 2025, at 5:25 PM, Karen S. Canady via Pct <
> pct at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
> We have been asked to file a US National Stage on short notice and now see
> that the priority provisional was filed in the name of “The University of
> X” whereas the PCT 101 identified the applicant as “University of X”. When
> you google the university, it states that the legal name is “The University
> of X” and that their “preferred name” is “University of X”.
>
> We try to always ensure the Applicant name is the same in both documents,
> but here we are. Does anyone know of TYFOIL or other issues that make this
> a problem? If so, what is the best version of their name to use for the US
> National Stage entry? We plan to stick with the name as used in the PCT,
> but wondering if there is any corrective action we should be taking.
>
> Karen S. Canady *|* Partner
>
> canady + lortz LLP <http://www.canadylortz.com/>
> 3435 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1400
> Los Angeles, CA 90010
>
> T: 310.966.9400
> F: 909.494.4441
>
> karen at canadylortz.com <jane at canadylortz.com>
> 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.
>
>
> --
> Pct mailing list
> Pct at oppedahl-lists.com
> Click here to unsubscribe:
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com
>
>
> --
> Patentpractice mailing list
> Patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com
>
> http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250926/d9be4f90/attachment.html>