[Pct] Notification/reporting correspondence to clients - PDF vs. email body

Wed Feb 14 15:55:58 EST 2024

I prefer messages in the email body. I never quite understood the point of attaching PDFs to report PTO correspondence.
The most annoying PDF reporting letters are those that are not OCR-ed/searchable.
And by replacing PDF reporting letter attachments with “email-body reporting”, still enough attachments remain that need to be handled, sorted and analyzed.

From: Pct <pct-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of George Jakobsche via Pct
Sent: Wednesday, 14 February 2024 22:40
To: For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <pct at oppedahl-lists.com>
Cc: George Jakobsche <george at jakobschelaw.com>; David Boundy <DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Notification/reporting correspondence to clients - PDF vs. email body

Agreed. I have two clients that explicitly instructed me to include reports in the bodies of e-mail messages, and not to attach reporting letters to e-mail messages.

Best regards,
George
George Jakobsche Patent Counsel PLLC
39 Old Farm Road, Concord, MA 01742-5234
George at JakobscheLaw.com<mailto:George at JakobscheLaw.com> | +1-978-245-8100

This e-mail is from George Jakobsche Patent Counsel PLLC, a law firm, and it may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not read, copy, or distribute this message or any attachment(s). Instead, please notify the sender and delete the message and the attachment(s). Thank you.

From: Pct <pct-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:pct-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com>> on behalf of Orvis via Pct <pct at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:pct at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Date: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 at 3:28 PM
To: For users of the PCT and ePCT. This is not for laypersons to seek legal advice. <pct at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:pct at oppedahl-lists.com>>
Cc: Orvis <orvispc at gmail.com<mailto:orvispc at gmail.com>>, David Boundy <DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com<mailto:DavidBoundyEsq at gmail.com>>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Notification/reporting correspondence to clients - PDF vs. email body
The overwhelming amount of day-to-day correspondence should be in an email. We are here to serve, and you risk annoying your clients by making them click to open a pdf with something that could have more efficiently been communicated in the body of the email. Some foreign associate emails come to mind. Ever get an email with an attachment that does not open right on the phone that you spend time trying to view, only to later remember to open the pdf of a one page letter when at a PC to read a one sentence update: "The Honorable hearing officer cancelled the hearing the nth time and will reschedule"?

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 2:22 PM David Boundy via Pct <pct<mailto:pct at oppedahl-lists.com>@oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:pct at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:
The list of criteria basically provides the answer -- which characteristic is important to what letter?

I send engagement letters as PDFs (the formality is essential), bills as PDFs (that's what my firm's billing system generates), agendas for monthly meeting in PDF (the formality is psychologically useful) (but during the phone call, I take notes in the Word doc).   Routine correspondence (such as reporting either incoming our outgoing correspondence, requesting instrutions for either reply or for 1-year filing deadline) as email body.

On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 2:09 PM Carl Oppedahl via Pct <pct<mailto:pct at oppedahl-lists.com>@oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:pct at oppedahl-lists.com>> wrote:

A listserv member asks to post anonymously ...

Hi listmates,

We are currently reconsidering the manner in which we send notifications / reporting correspondence to our clients. I’m referring to correspondence such as

  *   Reporting filing of a patent application
  *   Reporting official communication from a patent office
  *   Reporting an action taken at a patent office, such as responding to an Office Action or filing an IDS
  *   Notification of upcoming 1-year Paris Convention deadline
  *   Notification of upcoming 30-month PCT national phase deadline

The factors currently affecting our decision include:

  *   A PDF letter at least seems more fixed/permanent, and is a discrete “document”.
  *   A PDF letter is more aesthetically pleasing, and can give an impression of formality and/or professionalism.
  *   A PDF letter makes it frustrating for the recipient who is required to take the extra step of opening an attachment in order to read the correspondence.
  *   An email-body letter conveniently remains available below replies/reminders sent in response to the original correspondence.
  *   When accompanying the correspondence with a bill for services rendered, sending the correspondence as an email-body letter avoids potential confusion from multiple/mixture of attachments.

I’d be very interested to hear your thoughts on whether it is preferable to send such correspondence in the body of an email, or as a PDF attachment to an email. Perhaps you even have different preferences for different types of correspondence. I’d also be interested to know what you do in reality!

--
Pct mailing list
Pct at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:Pct at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com

--
[Image removed by sender.]<https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy>     <https://www.iam-media.com/strategy300/individuals/david-boundy>

David Boundy | Partner | Potomac Law Group, PLLC
P.O. Box 590638, Newton, MA  02459
Tel (646) 472-9737 | Fax: (202) 318-7707
dboundy<mailto:dboundy at potomaclaw.com>@potomaclaw.com<mailto:dboundy at potomaclaw.com> | www.potomaclaw.com<http://www.potomaclaw.com>
Articles at http://ssrn.com/author=2936470<http://ssrn.com/author=2936470>
Click here to add me to your contacts.<https://www.keynect.us/requestCardAccess/USA500DBOUN?>

--
Pct mailing list
Pct at oppedahl-lists.com<mailto:Pct at oppedahl-lists.com>
http://oppedahl-lists.com/mailman/listinfo/pct_oppedahl-lists.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20240214/01c897ba/attachment.htm>