[Pct] Responding to PCT/RO/106 Form from USPTO

Mon Jun 30 20:06:08 UTC 2025

Someone with the USPTO once told me (when the USPTO wanted better drawings than the replacement ones I filed in response to their nitpickiness) to always indicate in the response that the replacement drawings are “THE BEST AVAILABLE”, because the patent offices can’t require drawings that are better than the best available.

Thus, I always state in the response: These are THE BEST AVAILABLE.

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: Pct <pct-bounces at oppedahl-lists.com> On Behalf Of Timothy Snowden via Pct
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2025 12:54 PM
To: pct at oppedahl-lists.com
Cc: Timothy Snowden <tdsnowden at outlook.com>
Subject: Re: [Pct] Responding to PCT/RO/106 Form from USPTO

In such cases I just re-submit the indicated drawings and politely point out that I've done nothing but re-rasterize and upload. BTW - rasterization at 300dpi using a tool like PDFX-Change or Adobe gives you more control over how they look.

Here's a snippet I have in my template:

"Amendments to DRAWING SHEET(s) ***
Applicant submits replacement drawing sheets *** containing FIG(S). ***. The sheets contain reproduction of the originally filed drawings. The replacement drawings are re-submitted unchanged in case there was a quality downgrade of the drawings during processing by the Receiving Office. As such, no new matter has been added. "

On 6/30/2025 11:48 AM, Joe Brennan via Pct wrote:
I received a PCT/RO/106 form from the USPTO stating that the drawings in a PCT application do not allow for reasonably uniform international publication because several figures lack simplicity and clarity and that the text is blurry. I'm surprised by this, because the exact same drawings were used in two other PCT applications without any objection being raised, as well as in an issued US patent without any problems.

I spoke with the USPTO officer on the form, and he told me several things:

  1.  The IB is "cracking down" (his words) on the USPTO, which is why they are scrutinizing drawings more closely.

  1.  He can't see the drawings as shown in the Supplemental Content menu item in Patent Center. I assume he can see only the horribly down sampled drawings as shown in the Documents & Transactions menu item.

  1.  They will still transmit the PCT application to the IB (which in fact it has been, and the drawings look fine on ePCT - identical to the drawings as filed).

  1.  We can respond to the PCT/RO/106 with a response stating that the drawings do permit reasonably uniform publication.

With respect to #4, does anyone have an example response they can point me to? I'm curious to see how others have responded to this form.

Thank you,
Joe

[cid:image001.jpg at 01DBE9D8.E3045000]

Ahmann Kloke LLP
650 Gilman Street
Palo Alto, CA 94301
www.ahmannkloke.com<http://www.ahmannkloke.com/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250630/5498d284/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 39390 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://oppedahl-lists.com/pipermail/pct_oppedahl-lists.com/attachments/20250630/5498d284/attachment.jpg>