Edlyn, Thank you for your input.
There are two issues: uniqueness and user compatibility.
For databases to work well, the document identifiers must be unique particu=
larly if one wants to create relations between databases. This unique iden=
tifier need not be humanly readable (and some experts in database design re=
commend that it not be).
If there is a unique way of identifying U.S. applications - and there is ac=
cording to Carl, then this can serve for creating relations between databas=
es based on priority numbers. (Nothing new here. Database providers have =
been creating patent families for years.)
As Carl has pointed out, the P suffix for provisionals has already become a=
mbiguous and thus fatally flawed. Replacing the series number by the year =
is misleading and subject to error.
Once we have a unique identifier, we can create compatibility for users wit=
h simple algorithms such as replacing 60 and 61 series prefixes with P suff=
ixes. This will introduce ambiguity but if that is what the user wants, ok=
ay. We just need to keep it away from the underlying mechanics of the data=
base by treating it as a separate field. (General strategy: derive desired=
, but flawed, fields from reliable fields in order to preserve the integrit=
y of the latter.)
My original question was whether or not the U.S. application numbers can se=
rve as unique identifiers so that I can write SS/NNN,NNN as NN,NNN,NNN - ex=
cluding the year - with no loss of information. And the answer so far has =
been, "Yes." (This may seem obvious, but in patents nothing can be safely =
treated as obvious.) In fact, including the year is undesirable as it is a=
possible source of error and adds no information. You can't make a unique=
identifier more unique - but you can make it wrong.
-----Original Message-----
From: Simmons, Edlyn [mailto:simmons.es_at_pg.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 4:26 AM
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: RE: [PIUG List] U.S. application number format
Let's not forget two problems with the SS/NNNNNN serial numbers. Prior
to 2000, the USPTO didn't print the series number on the face of a
patent. And for decades most patent databases have been using the
application year to create unambiguous serial numbers. Using the
application year alone turned out to be unambiguous in 2003, when the
provisional application series 60 crossed the utility patent series 10,
and the solution was to use the suffix "P" to cure the ambiguity.
As a user of multiple databases, I suggest that the foremost
consideration in getting it "right" in a new database is to use the same
format that older databases use.
Edlyn Simmons
-----Original Message-----
From: Austin, Robert [mailto:Robert.Austin_at_fiz-k.com]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 9:34 AM
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: RE: [PIUG List] U.S. application number format
Dear PIUG-L
Just a brief reminder that provisional application numbers (series 60)
are distinguished in all major international patent databases from
application numbers with an unambiguous standardised suffix "P". This
includes Espacenet, INPADOC, CAplus and the Derwent World Patents Index.
Of course this format, just like any other, does require that the
publishing authority uses the correct series in the details that they
publish.
Rob
Robert Austin
FIZ Karlsruhe
Tel: 609 333 1466
www.stn-international.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Gerben Gieling [mailto:Gerben.Gieling_at_synthon.nl]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 8:54 AM
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: RE: [PIUG List] U.S. application number format
Stephen,
In fact your example goes further than Alan's original assumption. Alan
suggested that no information would be lost when writing US application
numbers are written as 8 digit numbers. Your example shows that the
current Espacenet (and Inpadoc) approach of replacing the series number
by an application year can create unclarity concerning the true priority
where the (complete) source data is absolutely clear.
Gerben
-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Adams [mailto:stevea_at_magister.co.uk]
Sent: Monday, 21 April, 2008 11:12
To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Cc: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: Re: [PIUG List] U.S. application number format
Dear Alan
Although it will not take into account the finer details of the scheme
as given by Carl Oppedahl, you may find the following list helpful:
<http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/filingyr.htm>
This provides a concordance table such that, given a filing year, it is
possible to derive the series code. It shows that some series commenced
at a point in time which did not coincide with the end of the calendar
year. The one year to watch out for is 2003, when the regular filing
series 10
grew from approx. 350,000 to 750,000 at the same time as the provisional
application series 60 increased from 437,000 to 532,000. I have
examples where a PCT filing based on a series 60 priority from 2003 was
erroneously put into the same family with other cases claiming priority
from the series 10 application with the same number and year. Clearly,
in this particular case, combining a year with a serial number leads to
an ambiguous result.
Stephen
--
Stephen Adams
Magister Ltd.
Crown House, 231 Kings Road, Reading, RG1 4LS, GB
Tel: +44 (0)118 966 6520
Fax: +44 (0)118 966 6620
E-mail: stevea_at_magister.co.uk (replace _at_ by @ to use) Website :
http://www.magister.co.uk
Registered in England and Wales. Company No. 3407685
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
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
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?&
2cb
Unsubscribe Now:
1-7b3673
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER:
This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be
privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender
by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any
unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is
strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change.
Synthon shall not be liable for the improper or incomplete transmission
of the information contained in this communication nor for any delay in
its receipt or damage to your system. Synthon does not guarantee that
the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this
communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference. Any
views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and
may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
PIUG (r) -- 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
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?&
161
Unsubscribe Now:
8-11c6d9
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
PIUG (r) -- 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
Modify Your Subscription:
http://www.listbox.com/member/?&
258
Unsubscribe Now:
4-a6a272
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------
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 Tue Apr 22 2008 - 06:58:07
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Oct 17 2011 - 07:00:50