Hi Bob,
that is indeed the danger here. How can one be assured the chemicals that =
do have a registry number assigned to them have indeed been made if there i=
s no patent or journal prior art? Even a CAS RN does not guarantee that on=
e.
Hmm ...
Michael.
Michael Matthews
Organic Chemistry Searcher/
Chercheur de la Chimie Organique
CIPO/OPIC Patents/Brevets
Organic Chemistry/Chimie Organique
50 Victoria St., Place du Portage,
Phase 1 - 1408A
Gatineau, Québec
Canada
K1A 0C9
Tél./Tel.: (819) 997-8134
Courriel/Email : Matthews.Michael_at_ic.gc.ca
________________________________
From: BOB BUNTROCK [mailto:buntrock16_at_verizon.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 4:04 PM
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: Re: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN; catalogs

As Eric Shively said, situations like these demonstrate the value of using =
CASRN to accurately describe chemical compounds (as well as good nomenclatu=
re). Citing compounds only from Chemcats listings is dangerous. Citations=
to material in any online and e-version of any database, including documen=
t references, needs to have some sort of date stamp or "last accessed on ..=
." indication.
I would hope that any compound in Chemcats (and therefore in someone's cata=
log) has been made at some time or another. I would hope that suppliers of=
chemicals would not go on "fishing expeditions" and list news compounds th=
at the feel they could make if they had a customer. I suppose stranger (an=
d more devious) things happen. Caveat emptor.
-- Bob Buntrock
Orono, ME
----- Original Message -----
From: Sandy Burcham <mailto:cass123_at_earthlink.net>
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox <mailto:piug_discussion_list_at_v2.listbox=
.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10:08 AM
Subject: RE: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN
Dear Eric - I very much appreciate your response. I was rxtrtroubled to d=
iscover just how widespread this problem appears to be and was very much co=
ncerned about losing prior art retrievability. Since some of the cpds lis=
ted in Chemcats have never been made giving them a CASRN might not be withi=
n the parameters associated with that file , but since they have been publi=
sed in a catalog, cited as prior art - perhaps CA could create a file of wi=
thdrawn CPDS having someother means of being identified .
Sandy
-----Original Message-----
From: "Shively, Eric"
Sent: Jan 16, 2008 9:57 AM
To: "PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox"
Subject: RE: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN
Regarding the question raised by Sandy Burcham, the information on comme=
rcially available substances in CHEMCATS is provided by the vendors of thos=
e substances. They may withdraw a chemical from commercial availability at =
any time, at which point the record would be taken off of CHEMCATS. Howeve=
r, after a CHEMCATS listing is withdrawn, the substance record still appear=
s in the CAS Registry, along with the vendor's name as the source of that s=
ubstance's registration. So users can contact the vendor for more informati=
on as needed.
The concern addressed in this recent discussion highlights the value of i=
dentifying substances of interest by CAS Registry Number, because those rec=
ords will continue to be available in the CAS Registry, which is the author=
itative source. However, we recognize there is a problem if someone choose=
s to cite the CHEMCATS record or the supplier's chemical ID number as prior=
art. We will consider means of helping users deal with that problem.
Eric Shively
CAS
________________________________
From: Sandy Burcham [mailto:cass123_at_earthlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:57 AM
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Cc: piug_discussion_list_at_v2.listbox.com
Subject: Re: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN
Wendy Warr provided me wirh Ambinter's website and e-mail information. A=
mbinter responded to my request saying that the weird numbers were not the=
ir numbers either. So far no one has been able to identify the number form=
at. I am extremely upset about what is disappearing prior art. The people=
at CAS who are involved with Chemcats couldn't identify the format either =
but didn't seem bothered by the fact that the information hd come from thei=
r database originally and was no longer there-
Can we, as searchers, allow this prior art to disappear???
Sandy Burcham
________________________________
________________________________
PIUG List owner: Patent Information Users' Group Inc. (R), http://www.piu=
g.org <http://www.piug.org/>
PIUG List rules and guidelines: http://www.piug.org/list.php
PIUG List admin: piug_discussion_list-owner(at)v2(dot)listbox(dot)com
PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox | Modify <http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&> =
<http://www.listbox.com>
________________________________
________________________________
PIUG List owner: Patent Information Users' Group Inc. (R), http://www.piug=
.org <http://www.piug.org/>
PIUG List rules and guidelines: http://www.piug.org/list.php
PIUG List admin: piug_discussion_list-owner(at)v2(dot)listbox(dot)com
PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox | Modify <http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&> =
<http://www.listbox.com>
________________________________
________________________________
PIUG List owner: Patent Information Users' Group Inc. (R), http://www.piug.=
org <http://www.piug.org/>
PIUG List rules and guidelines: http://www.piug.org/list.php
PIUG List admin: piug_discussion_list-owner(at)v2(dot)listbox(dot)com
PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox | Modify <http://v2.listbox.com/member/?&> =
<http://www.listbox.com>
-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
PIUG List owner: Patent Information Users' Group Inc. (R), http://
www.piug.org
PIUG List rules and guidelines: http://www.piug.org/list.php
PIUG List admin: piug_discussion_list-owner(at)v2(dot)listbox(dot)com
PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
&id_secret=87112516-fafbb9
secret=85436559-c8af76
Received on Thu Jan 17 2008 - 22:23:11
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Oct 12 2008 - 07:03:03