Re: A puzzlement

simmons.es@pg.com
Wed, 18 Aug 1999 13:38:44 -0400

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Previous message: Stuart M Kaback: "Answer to puzzlement, I think"
Maybe in reply to: Stuart M Kaback: "A puzzlement"

I have a theory. It sounds to me as though the applicant is using a strategy
similar to the filing of a provisional application. If the application is filed
through the EPO, the eventual EP patent will expire 20 years after the original
filing date. If the EPO is designated in a PCT application, the eventual EP
patent will expire 20 years after the PCT filing date. Since the priority EP
application would expire a year sooner, it would be to the applicant's advantage
to abandon the EP application and pursue the PCT transfer instead. For that to
work, of course, the applicant would have to abandon the priority EP application
before grant.

Edlyn Simmons
simmons.es@pg.com

The Procter & Gamble Company
5299 Spring Grove Ave.
Cincinnati, Ohio 45217
Phone: (513) 627-5664 Fax: (513) 627-6854

Previous message: Stuart M Kaback: "Answer to puzzlement, I think"
Maybe in reply to: Stuart M Kaback: "A puzzlement"