RE: [PIUG List] search problem

This indeed will be a recurring problem. The fact that there is a registry=
 number for each compound provided by CAS does provide evidence that the co=
mpound was made. There have been other instances where I have found matche=
s from a substructure search in CAS Registry database, but there has been n=
o citation associated with the compounds. Speaking with CAS about these in=
stances, I was told there is a possibility that a compound was made by a co=
mpany and they received a registry number for the compound; however, they d=
o not want to disclose any information on the focus of their current resear=
ch. By having the compound registered with CAS, this prevents competitors =
from obtaining patents on the compounds, without disclosing who it is doing=
 the research in this area. I know in the past here at CIPO, these CAS Reg=
istry numbers are still cited against the applicant.

I hope this helps.

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


-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy Burcham [mailto:cass123_at_earthlink.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:42 AM
To: Matthews, Michael: #CIPO - OPIC; PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
Subject: RE: [PIUG List] search problem

Michael - thanks very much for your reply - I'll try that - however , the l=
arger question of retrievability really bothers me - if there are cpds cite=
d as prior art by examiners (or anyone else) there should be a way to retre=
ive them even if they are no longer available - and depending on the reason=
 for unavailability - should they have been in a catalog in the first place?

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Matthews, Michael: #CIPO - OPIC" <Matthews.Michael_at_ic.gc.ca>
>Sent: Jan 15, 2008 10:36 AM
>To: Sandy Burcham <cass123_at_earthlink.net>, "PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox=
" <piug_discussion_list_at_v2.listbox.com>
>Subject: RE: [PIUG List] search problem
>
>Hi Sandy,
>
>This concerns me, as I work at CIPO as an organic chemistry searcher on pr=
ior art. What may help is the supplier name and entry date provided in the=
 CAS Registry entry. The Supplier is "Ambinter" and this particular regist=
ry number you gave was entered on August 16, 2002. It may help then, to fi=
nd a catalogue from Ambinter from the year 2002; here you will probably fin=
d your compound. As for the number format, I have not been able to find th=
is number in the CAS Registry database, nor on Ambinter's web site. Even s=
earching the structure at Ambinter there are not hits, this is probably bec=
ause they no longer supply the compound(s). I would contact them and reque=
st a copy of their 2002 catalogue (which I'm sure they must have somewhere).
>
>Good luck and keep me posted!
>
>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
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sandy Burcham [mailto:cass123_at_earthlink.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 9:27 AM
>To: PIUG Discussion List @ Listbox
>Subject: [PIUG List] search problem
>
>Help! In an International search report from 2004, a list of relevant co=
mpounds were reported retrieved from Chemcats having a weird and untraceabl=
e order number format.
>
>the format is: 094_12494-10292-103 (with different numbers for each entry.=
 ) One cpd was given the following registry number 444054-63-1 correspondin=
g to 094_12313-11057-104. this cpd is in registry but no longer in Chemcats=
 although the registry entry identifies it as being in chemcats. I sent th=
is information to CA and was informed that as new catalogs are entered and =
some cpds removed retrievability disappears. However, no one at CA could i=
dentify the order number format. I have over 30 of these cpds to idnetify.=
  Can any of you help me withthe format? And also, once these cpds are ide=
ntified as prior art, shouldn't they be retrievable - perhaps in another da=
tabase of Removed cpds?
>
>Help! Please! Sandy Burcham
>610-630-6616
>cass123_at_earthlink.net
>
>-------------------------------------------
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>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

-------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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=86011356-6d7095
secret=85436559-c8af76

Received on Tue Jan 15 2008 - 17:05:00