I would have ventured that this pattern was a reflection of that company's
budgetary or procedural concerns, but it is curious that these overseas
filings are basic applications.
Do these applications not claim priority of previously filed Japanese
applications?
Very truly yours,
Paul Koroluk,
Yoshida Kanayama Ishida & Assoc.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MPBigwood@aol.com [SMTP:MPBigwood@aol.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 16, 1999 1:13 AM
> To: PIUG-L@derwent.tecc.co.uk
> Subject: Foreign filings by Japanese company
>
> Dear All
>
> For the last two Quarters, I have been involved with a technology watch
> process that includes monitoring of patenting activity at Japanese
> companies.
> The quarterly downloads for one of them, in both cases, contained a few
> foreign filings dispersed throughout the set consisting mainly of Japanese
>
> applications, but ended with a solid block of foreign filings. In other
> words, since the download is in reverse chronological order, it would
> appear
> that the company in questions submits a whole bunch of foreign filings
> (basic
> applications) at the beginning of each Quarter.
>
> Is there any significance to this pattern?
>
> Mike Bigwood (the Bibliometric Fanatic)