Search the Archives           Subscribe           About this News Service           Reader Comments


Archived updates for Tuesday, April 29, 2008

USPTO Publishes Common Application Format for EPO and JPO

As the result of a trilateral conference ending November 9,2007, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced that it had signed a memorandum of understanding with the European Patent Office (EPO) and the Japan Patent Office (JPO) addressing the global workload challenges arising from the growth and complexity of patent applications worldwide. Among other things, the offices "agreed on a common application format which will simplify and streamline application filing requirements in each office to allow applicants to prepare a single
application in the common application format for acceptance in each of the three offices." Under the Basic
Priciples of that Trilateral Work Group
, "An application which complies with the Common Application Format shall be accepted without any further amendment by any of the Trilateral Offices as a national/regional application as far as the agreed-upon formal requirements are concerned. Each of the Trilateral Offices may provide requirements which are more favorable for applicants than the requirements provided for by the Common Application Format."

The USPTO has now released additional information concerning this common application format in what appears to
be a
pre-OG notice available on the Internet. According to the Notice:

This format, which was developed in consultation with users from the three regions, will simplify and streamline
application filing requirements in each Office to allow applicants to prepare a single application in the common application format for acceptance in each of the three Offices.
. . .

Implementation Status of the Common Application Format

EPO: The EPO is planning to implement the Common Application Format (CAF) in the beginning of 2009. Paper, PDF and XML format will be accepted.


JPO: The JPO is preparing for the introduction of the Common Application Format in early 2009, except that the sequence listing is a separate part of the description and that the request contains the number of the figure of the drawings which the applicant suggests should accompany the abstract are scheduled to be introduced in 2011.

USPTO: Current USPTO rules and procedure are consistent with the Common Application Format. While some of the requirements of the Common Application Format go beyond what the USPTO requires, the USPTO will accept an application in the Common Application Format.

Example Format

The following is an example of a patent application format which complies with the Common Application Format. For legibility purposes, each heading is indented in this paper.

Description

Title of Invention

Technical Field

0001

Background Art

0002

Summary of Invention

Technical Problem

0003

Solution to Problem

0004

0005

Advantageous Effects of Invention

0006

Brief Description of Drawings


0007

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Description of Embodiments

0008

Examples

0009

0010

Example 1

0011

Example 2

0012

Industrial Applicability

0013

Reference Signs List

0014

Reference to Deposited Biological Material


0015

Sequence Listing Free Text

0016

Citation List Patent Literature


0017

Non Patent Literature

0018

Claims

Claim 1

Claim 2

Abstract

Drawings

Fig. 1

Fig. 2

Sequence Listing

Relation of the Common Application Format to the PLT and PCT

The Common Application Format rationalizes divergent filing requirements applied in each of the Trilateral Offices. Noting that the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) has not yet come into force for any of the Trilateral Offices, some elements of the Common Application Format harmonize diverging filing requirements for national/regional applications filed in each of the Trilateral Offices by referring to the corresponding PCT provisions, which
would apply prior to the PLT coming into effect for all of the Trilateral Offices. Other elements of the Common Application Format address issues not regulated by the PCT for which the offices have different practices. Still
other elements pertain to issues that go beyond the PCT but, in terms of future development, represent what the offices consider to be appropriate means for addressing those issues.

For further information, please contact Diana Oleksa at 571-272-3291.

For more background on the Common Application Format, check out the "Website of the Trilateral Cooperation" with the links to the following information from November 20, 2007:
As noted by Patent Docs on April 28, 2008, Annex I previously clarified that

  • Applicants will not be required to remove National Legends (i.e., cross references to related applications and statements regarding federal funding) from the description.
  • A statement of industrial applicability shall be included when it is not obvious from the description or nature of the invention.
  • Applicants will not be required to remove any reference citation list from the description.
  • Applicants shall use the International System of Units (SI) in the description, but may use additional alternative unit systems as long as SI units are placed in parentheses.
  • Paragraphs of the description (but not the title or section headings) shall be numbered consecutively using Arabic numerals.
  • Mathematical or chemical formulae shall be preceded by a sign indicating that the formula is mathematical ("Math.") or chemical ("Chem."), followed by a space, and then by an Arabic numeral (e.g., Chem. 1)
  • Tables shall be preceded by a sign indicating that the table is a table ("Table"), followed by a space, and then by an Arabic numeral (e.g., Table 1)
  • Claims shall be preceded by a sign indicating that the claim is a claim ("Claim"), followed by a space, and then by an Arabic numeral (e.g., Claim 1).
    (3)comment(s)     translate     More Updates     Send    

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why would anyone put in a problem to be solved given KSR's idiotic and backward obvious to try and common sense rejection rationales that the USPTO will ram down the applicant's throat?

April 30, 2008 8:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

NFW. Do I look like an idiot? Anyone putting in the solution is asking to be sued. A patent DOES NOT have to provide a solution to a problem. IT IS a way of doing/producing something. That's all.

May 06, 2008 3:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

^^Thanks!!

婚前徵信婚姻感情大陸抓姦外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信尋人感情挽回大陸抓姦離婚工商徵信婚前徵信外遇抓姦感情挽回尋人大陸抓姦離婚家暴工商徵信法律諮詢跟蹤工商徵信婚前徵信感情挽回外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴尋人大陸抓姦離婚大陸抓姦外遇尋人家暴工商徵信法律諮詢家暴感情挽回大陸抓姦外遇婚前徵信離婚尋人工商徵信外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信大陸抓姦尋人感情挽回外遇抓姦婚前徵信感情挽回尋人大陸抓姦工商徵信法律諮詢離婚家暴工商徵信外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信尋人感情挽回大陸抓姦離婚婚前徵信工商徵信外遇抓姦尋人離婚家暴大陸抓姦感情挽回法律諮詢離婚感情挽回婚前徵信外遇抓姦家暴尋人工商徵信外遇抓姦法律諮詢家暴婚前徵信尋人感情挽回">徵大陸抓姦離婚婚前徵信工商徵信外遇抓姦尋人離婚家暴大陸抓姦感情挽回法律諮詢

April 06, 2009 11:35 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home