Louise,
I was certain that one of the database producers would try to answer your
question, but in their absence, I may be able to offer some suggestions.
US 4,505,558 isn't the first patent I've heard about that has a reassignment
recorded after the published lapse date. Since you can't reassign a patent
after it's expired, you can bet that a late maintenance fee was accepted. There
was probably a notice printed in the Official Gazette sometime after the 1993
lapse date.
I can only guess why the people in the PTO didn't have information about late
payments of maintenance fees; it's probably related to the reason why the
information isn't in IBM/Delphion or Lexis-Nexis. Some of the information in the
Official Gazette is entered into computer files that are sent to database
producers, and some of the information isn't. Most of the missing data is in
the text of the OG Notices section of the OG. That's where you find information
about late acceptances of maintenance fees, adverse decisions in interferences,
and disclaimers. Until a few years ago, nobody had that information in
databases because the PTO didn't provide it. After some nudging by customers,
IFI started keying in the missing data, so it's in the later records in the
Current Legal Status file.
By the way, I checked one more site for these two patents. The USPTO PAIR site,
where you can check the PTO's patent status and file history database for issued
patents, indicates that the patents were issued and are in the warehouse.
There's nothing to suggest that they lapsed or were revived. So the people you
were talking to must have been using some other databases.
Edlyn Simmons
Internet Mail Message
Received from host: luggage.tecc.co.uk
[193.128.6.129]
Envelope Sender: owner-piug-l@tecc.co.uk
From: Louise Franco <intprop@earthlink.net> on 08/08/2000 04:18 PM
Please respond to intprop@earthlink.net
To: piug-l@derwent.tecc.co.uk
cc: (bcc: Edlyn Simmons-ES/PGI)
Subject: MAINTENANCE FEE INFO-WHATS RELIABE?
Is there any reliable source when dealing with the issue of maintenance
fees? Here's why:
I was asked to check if maintenance fees were paid for the following
U.S. Patents: 4,505,558 & 4,491,836. Look what happened:
U.S. 4,505,558:
1. No mention of failure to pay on the IBM site.
2. Called the USPTO voice response system. Expired on 2/14/93.
3. Spoke to a person at the Maintenance branch. Told me it expired in
March of 93.
4. Checked File 123 and 345 on Dialog. No mention of failure to pay
but there was a reassignment recorded on 10/2/98.
5. Lexis has no mention of failure to pay.
In regards to the reassignment, why would a company want a patent that
was no longer in force? Is there something I'm missing here or did
everyone miss the fact that perhaps the patent was reinstated?
U.S. 4,491,836:
1. Checked IBM site. Has 3/11/97 as the expiration date.
2. Called the USPTO voice response system. Has 12/29/96 as expiration
date.
3. Called a person at the Maintenance branch. Was told 1/1/93 was the
expiration date. (she really did give 93 as expiration year)
4. Checked file 123 in Dialog. Does mention expiration date of 1/1/97
but that it was also reinstated on 3/11/97. Record of reassignment is
also noted.
5. Lexis mentioned failure to pay but failed to mention it was
reinstated.
Notice the USPTO both via person and voice response system failed to
mention the patent was reinstated.
Can anyone comment on their experience in regards to obtaining
maintenance fee info? It shouldn't take 10 sources to check out
something as simple as this.
Thanks,
Louise
SSM&P
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Aug 10 2001 - 15:58:44 EDT