RE: [PIUG List] U.S. application number format

Thank you Carl.

Is it possible for two applications to have the same Series/Serial number?

If not then no information is lost by using an 8-digit number with the 2 mo=
st significant digits being the Series number.

-----Original Message-----
From: Carl Oppedahl [mailto:carl_at_oppedahl.com]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 1:22 PM
To: Alan
Cc: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: Re: [PIUG List] U.S. application number format

Alan wrote on 4/20/2008 10:00 PM:
>
> As everyone on this list knows, U.S. application numbers consist of a
> series number and a serial number in the format SS/NNNNNN where SS is
> the series and NNNNNN is the serial number. Â In formatting this as =
a
> priority number Espacenet discards the SS and replaces it with the
> application year. Â So going from an Espacenet application number or=
 
> priority number to the USPTO number forces the user to look up the
> series dates.
>
>
>
> Am I correct in understanding that the U.S. series numbers advance
> when and only when NNNNNN reaches 1 million? Â In other words, the=
 
> SS-slash is simply and antiquated column place holder and no
> information content would be lost by writing U.S. application numbers
> as 8-digit serial numbers.
>
>
>
The answer to your question is not easy.

Series numbers "advance" or go the opposite direction not only by NNNNNN
reaching 999999. What is important to keep in mind is that there are
several systems at USPTO, each of which hands out serial numbers.

The patent e-filing system at USPTO for ordinary utility patent
applications hands out serial numbers.

The patent e-filing system at USPTO for entry into the US national stage
hands out serial numbers.

The people at USPTO who receive paper-filed ordinary utility patent
applications hand out serial numbers.

The people at USPTO who receive paper-filed entry into the US national
stage from PCT hand out serial numbers.

Each of these systems hands out serial numbers, and they get them in
blocks of 1000. Each of these systems advances through its block of
1000 at its own rate, unrelated to the progress of the other three
systems in advancing through their respective blocks of 1000.

In the old days of the ePave patent e-filing system (which predated the
present EFS-Web patent e-filing system), very few applicants chose
electronic instead of paper. The result was that a block of 1000
serial numbers for e-filing might take a couple of years to use up.
This led, IIRC, to a situation where at one point paper-filed patent
applications were receiving 11-series serial numbers, and at the same
time e-filed patent applications were receiving 10-series serial numbers.

I have a pending case right now (an ordinary utility patent application)
that was e-filed January 10, 2005, and it received a serial number of
10/905,5XX. And I have a case that is an entry into the US national
stage from a PCT, where the national-stage papers were e-filed July 30,
2006, and it received a serial number of 10/597,5XX. (The last couple
of digits are redacted to protect client confidences.) Note that the
case filed six months later (yes, I am aware that the true filing date
for a national-stage case is the filing date of the PCT) received a
serial number that was four hundred thousand digits smaller.

It strikes me that trimming off and discarding the series code, and
attempting to use the filing year instead, could lead to nasty
ambiguities. It strikes me that it would be a big mistake for any
database provider to trim off and discard the US series codes.




-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
PIUG ® -- Celebrating Our 20th Anniversary

PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
List owner: Patent Information Users' Group Inc., http://www.piug.org
List rules and guidelines: http://www.piug.org/list.php
List admins: piug_discussion_list-owner(at)v2(dot)listbox(dot)com

3&id_secret=101952990-a5e9bf
_secret=101483107-69b265

Received on Mon Apr 21 2008 - 07:11:09