Re: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN; catalogs

Let's do a reality check!

1.Cpds from the catalogs in the Chemcats file are cited as prior art in = search reports.
2. Not all of these cpds have CAS Rn's

3.Too frequently these cpds are removed from the catalog -

4. It is difficult, if not impossible, to find these cpds

5. This is unacceptable ( or should be)

6. The easiest method would be for the database producer to create a dat= abase of removed cpds with an identifying number connecting them to or= iginal reference until there is a way for all of them to have Registry Numb= ers -

Sandy Burcham

-----Original Message-----
From: BOB BUNTROCK
Sent: Jan 18, 2008 9:55 AM
To: "PIUG Discussion List = @ Listbox"
Subject: Re: [PIUG List= ] search problem, CASRN; catalogs

=

At least by going to the CA REG file, you can determine= which compopunds have no literature or patent citations.  As metnione= d previously, I and others have written extensively on the CAS Registry Sys= tem (1,2,3).  Take the time to learn more about it and use it effectiv= ely.

 

In the first ref., I cite and dispel several "myths" at= tributed to CASRN.  Myth 4, "All CASRN in the various sources are assi= gned and used accurately and precisely".  My terse comment, "not compl= etely true".  Consult these references and citation therein for a more= complete story. 

 

Bottom line:  CASRN and the CAS Registry system ar= e far more accurate than any other chemical identification system going.&nb= sp; The latter, unlike many other sources including chemical catalogs, is a= living, edited and corrected document.  My advice to anyone writing p= atents is document chemical compounds accurately and redundantly.  As = before, document ANY electronic source with a date last accessed and prefer= ably with your own electronic and paper copy.  Caveat emptor.

 

The PIUG Vendor/producer Committee has a continuing int= erest in the various sources patent information professionals use in both s= earching and producing patent documents.  I'm the liaison for the stat= us and use of files such as PubChem.  Since the basic input for PubChe= m comes from suppliers and producers, the file does have significant accura= cy and ease of correction problems.  Please furnish me with any input = you have on the use of this interesting but often problematic file.<= /DIV>

 

-- Bob Buntrock

Buntrock Associates

buntrock16@verizon.net

 

1. Chemical Registries--in the Fourth Decade of Service= , R. E. Buntrock, JCICS, 41, 2001, p. 259-263 (and refs. therein)

 

2. Chemical Abstracts Service Registry System: His= tory, Scope, and Impacts., JASIS 48, 1997, 349-360.

 

3. J. E. Blackwood, et al. [CAS], JCICS 31, 1991, 204-2= 12.

 

----- Original Message -----

= From: Matthews, Michael: #CIPO - OPIC

To: BOB BUNTROCK ;= PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox=

Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2008 4:1= 6 PM

Subject: RE: [PIUG List] search prob= lem, CASRN; catalogs

Hi Bob,

 

that is indeed the danger here.  How can one be assur= ed the chemicals that do have a registry number assigned to them have indee= d been made if there is no patent or journal prior art?  Even a CAS RN= does not guarantee that one.

 

Hmm ...

 

Michael.

 

Michael Matthews
Organic Chemistry Searcher/
Cherc= heur de la Chimie Organique
CIPO/OPIC Patents/Brevets=
Organic Chemi= stry/Chimie Organique
50 Victoria St., Place du Portage,<= /I>
Phase 1 - = 1408A
Gatineau, Québec
= Canada
K1A 0C9Tél./Tel.:&= nbsp; (819) 997-8134
Courriel/Email : Matthews.Michael@ic.gc.ca

 

---

From: BOB BUNTROCK [mailto:buntrock16@v= erizon.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 wel= l as good nomenclature).  Citing compounds only from Chemcats listings= is dangerous.  Citations to material in any online and e-version of a= ny database, including document references, needs to have some sort of date= stamp or "last accessed on ..." indication.

 

I would hope that any compound in Chemcats (and therefo= re in someone's catalog) has been made at some time or another.  I wou= ld hope that suppliers of chemicals would not go on "fishing expeditions" a= nd list news compounds that the feel they could make if they had a customer= .  I suppose stranger (and more devious) things happen.  Cav= eat emptor.

 

-- Bob Buntrock

Orono, ME

----- Original Message -----

= From: Sandy Burcham

To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox

Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 10= :08 AM

Subject: RE: [PIUG List] search prob= lem, CASRN

Dear Eric - I very much appreciate your response.  I was rxtrtroubl= ed to discover just how widespread this problem appears to be and was very = much concerned about losing prior art retrievability.   Since som= e of the cpds listed in Chemcats have never been made giving them a CASRN m= ight not be within the parameters associated with that file , but since the= y have been publised in a catalog, cited as prior art - perhaps CA could cr= eate a file of withdrawn CPDS having someother means of being identified .=

Sandy

-----Original Message-----
From: "Shively, Eric"
Sen= t: Jan 16, 2008 9:57 AM
To: "PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox"
Subjec= t: RE: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN

Regarding  the question raised by Sandy Burcham, the information = on commercially available substance= s in CHEMCATS is provided by the vendors of those substances. They may with= draw a chemical from commercial availability at any time, at which point the record would be taken off of  = CHEMCATS. However, after a CHEMCATS listing is withdrawn, the <= SPAN class=102290514-16012008>substance record still appears in th= e CAS Registry, along with the vendor's na= me as the source of that substance's registration. So users can cont= act the vendor for more information as needed. 

The concern addressed in this recent discussion highlights the valu= e of identifying substances of interest by CAS Registry Number, because tho= se records will continue to be available in the CAS Registry, which is the authoritative source.  However, we re= cognize there is a problem if someone chooses to cite the CHEMCATS record o= r the supplier's chemical ID number as prior art.  We will consider me= ans of helping users deal with that problem.

Eric Shively

CAS

---

From: Sandy Burcham [mailto:cass123@ear= thlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 8:57 AM
To:<= /B> PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Cc: piug_discussion_list@v2.li= stbox.com
Subject: Re: [PIUG List] search problem, CASRN

Wendy Warr provided me wirh Ambinter's website and e-mail information.&n= bsp; Ambinter responded to  my request saying that the weird numbers w= ere not their numbers either.  So far no one has been able to identify= the number format.  I am extremely upset about what is disappearing p= rior art.  The people at CAS who are involved with Chemcats couldn't i= dentify the format either but didn't seem bothered by the fact that the inf= ormation hd come from their 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.piug.org
PIUG List rules= and guidelines: h= ttp://www.piug.org/list.php
PIUG List admin: piug_discussion_list-ow= ner(at)v2(dot)listbox(dot)com

PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox | Modify Y= our Subscription | Unsubscribe Now

---

---

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 | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now