[Patentpractice] Fw: Patent Center change - another way to publicly access file history

Tue Sep 30 18:25:38 UTC 2025

Yes GD does not require you to log in and prove who you are.

Each participating office has its own track record as to how reliably it 
makes its content available to GD.  There have been times when USPTO was 
a bit spotty about making its content available to GD.

GD also comes nowhere close to letting you see the entirety of the IFW 
and does not give you the entirety of the other information that is 
different from IFW.

But yes, GD is available and could serve some of these same functions to 
some extent.

On 9/30/2025 10:32 AM, Tim Ackermann via Patentpractice wrote:
> Isn't Global Dossier also still available for anyone to use?
> https://globaldossier.uspto.gov/
> Tim Ackermann
> The Ackermann Law Firm
>
> E: tim at ackermannlaw.com
> P:  817.305.0690
> F:  214.453.0810
> W: ackermannlaw.com <http://ackermannlaw.com>
> O: 1785 State Hwy 26 Ste 200
>      Grapevine TX 76051
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 11:11 AM Dana Stangel via Patentpractice 
> <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>
>     There is another way to publicly access the file wrapper of
>     published applications.  It is more awkward to use than patent
>     center, at least with the current interface for my purposes, but
>     it doesn't require login.  It seems to work better with some
>     browsers than others, but I haven't worked with it much yet.
>     Links:
>     https://data.uspto.gov/patent-file-wrapper/search
>     https://data.uspto.gov/home
>     You might consider sharing the links with your foreign associates,
>     most of them want to be able to see files electronically too.
>     -Dana
>
>     ----- Forwarded Message -----
>     *From:* david--- via Patentpractice
>     <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
>     *To:* Dan Feigelson <djf at iliplaw.com>
>     *Cc:* david at hricik.com <david at hricik.com>;
>     "patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com"
>     <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, September 30, 2025 at 08:22:38 AM MDT
>     *Subject:* Re: [Patentpractice] Patent Center change
>
>     I thought about that route (provisional). It does seem to be
>     likely to be unlawful but I need to read the statutes.  There’s no
>     more physical shoes where you can search prior art,and I assume
>     those had been statutorily required.
>
>     Don’t get me started on the rest.
>     David Hricik
>     151 Country Creek Rd.
>     Macon, GA 31220
>
>
>>     On Sep 30, 2025, at 9:07 AM, Dan Feigelson <djf at iliplaw.com> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>     David, I have not looked at the form for verifying one's identity
>>     via paper since getting a USPTO account many years ago.  So in
>>     response to your email, I looked at what the USPTO has to say
>>     about using PatentCenter, and found that the instructions for new
>>     users
>>     <https://gcfagjf.r.af.d.sendibt2.com/tr/cl/RG5kATAGQJxrnW1-ouDyea13AEap9uuOfvVtEDPXIW_LiBnKHPMM2NdkmX27ZnZ_ussJJRU1GuLbpkixX7BPr3y3WY97h99caerCZDSud_BSdG1DZ-TGH0dx2PiblyRCy4fLwPUw-BESQVHlQiYKU7JTq79l9OYRkN7sMCEuEWuXdFl5ykQIolp_-mnR_MUk6MB5VXHbPwe0zTNds29iEocTiS0yfpqWuOs64m4SuCPSy8XU89MhcT0QxSTIjM4Pmw8BFYbfTkXxx5_VNEJiKwac9QaOMU2ZB0FjURncuAOPH6RaRKwLLOGsLd0SLltSzbeTkMGGxuyOLBoA-w>
>>     are themselves confusing. I also found that you appear to be
>>     correct: the paper form
>>     <https://gcfagjf.r.af.d.sendibt2.com/tr/cl/3EBu7EYo0Y10ibZZEuZzUEOP4uEl1HDVUXKaGerr81GHDWmlMCgZ9v3ZPwAoMKvRId4cqf-DSRRzwoJ_r2AQwDVe4_2AbbPQb7Xye9LPrNW3DRv7pnIn1mcd0rv7hYgZrmwxvJI5Pq7y_6QXmLNs0Zb21NNu7GOGfS_9IilEM7icJm9_nxJa7xb9N1EW2jkH_3qMRRSZHn1Gz9CCmfDuaiZmWnZIdB0fYvujt3W4TwODWdOaoqWDgTb5JkwKnKw4g-57FPebOiFFnR4H8eU79UKXIcgv-ovDIqPhY8ESOMJIiUbwX-hVEApQyUfrxTr6GlGp>
>>     for verifying one's ID with the PTO requires that one be a
>>     licensed practitioner, or a limited recognition practitioner, or
>>     a pro se inventor. If you're not one of those, you're not
>>     entitled to look at the USPTO records. Not only is that
>>     unbelievably stupid policy, but I'm certain that that position
>>     violates some federal statute, and even if allowed by statute,
>>     did not go through notice-and-comment rulemaking.
>>
>>     You could sue the PTO, but I suggest a cheaper course of action:
>>     think up a dumb idea that may be (but more likely is not)
>>     patentable, write a one-page description of that idea that
>>     includes at least one patent-type claim on the idea, and file the
>>     one-pager as a provisional patent application, listing yourself
>>     as inventor. That will make you a pro se inventor, which will
>>     allow you to register as a PatentCenter user under the PTO's
>>     current (indefensible) rules.  I suggest filing a provisional
>>     because (a) it's a low fee compared to a non-provision and (b)
>>     with a provisional, there's no requirement for an
>>     oath/declaration averring that you consider yourself to be the
>>     original inventor of what is claimed.
>>
>>     Finally, I'm thinking it must be really nice to be someone like
>>     Kathi Vidal, on whose watch they decided to destroy private and
>>     public PAIR. You FUBAR the agency you're the head of and the
>>     people who need that agency, then leave for a nice private-sector
>>     gig without any repercussions for the mess you created. Nice work
>>     if you can get it.
>>
>>     Dan
>>
>>
>>     On Tue, Sep 30, 2025 at 1:17 AM David Hricik via Patentpractice
>>     <patentpractice at oppedahl-lists.com> wrote:
>>
>>         Hi, all,
>>
>>         I doubt many of you need to use it, but the PTO recently
>>         (start of the month) changed patent center to only
>>         practitioners or “independent inventors” can have permission
>>         to access it.  For patent litigators or a lot of other
>>         people, that’s not a good development. Anyone know why the
>>         change?
>>
>>
>     -- 
>     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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/patentpractice_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250930/d6d91369/attachment.html>