Re: Inconsistency of IPDL at JPO????

From: Stephen Adams (stevea@magister.co.uk)
Date: Tue Jan 29 2002 - 14:24:29 GMT


Michael,
One possible explanation for a missing case is when the applicant is a
non-Japanese company. Prior to about 1992, it was assumed that patent
applications filed in Japan by non-Japanese companies would have
equivalents in another language elsewhere in the world, so no English
abstract was prepared for PAJ by JAPIO. I realise that you mention Kao
Corp as the applicant - in which case it should have been covered - but
is it possible that they had a Western co-applicant and that this fact
triggered rejection from the system?

--
Stephen Adams
Magister Ltd.
Crown House, 231 Kings Road, Reading, RG1 4LS, GB
Tel: +44 (0)118 929 9515
Fax: +44 (0)118 929 9516
e-mail:  stevea@magister.co.uk

Registered in England and Wales. Company No. 3407685 Registered address : Canada House, 272 Field End Road, Eastcote, Ruislip, Middlesex HA4 9NA.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Feb 14 2003 - 11:56:39 GMT