Stu Kaback brought up the point about inconsistent conversion
formatting for recent publications with German priority numbers in the
INPADOC file. We have been aware of this and are implementing fixes
for it.
This in no way affects the quality of family searching in the Orbit
version of the INPADOC file, and only affects crossfile searching of
Priority Numbers from INPADOC to other Orbit patent databases and
German application numbers. We use the INPADOC format to assemble
the family members. Until this is corrected, we recommend that you
crossfile with the Patent Numbers, not the Priority numbers.
As you know, it can be quite tedious to keep track of some of the more
interesting changes some of the patent offices have made with their
numbering systems. We agree with Stu that it is important to
standardize the number formats in all the databases and that Derwent
be used as the standard. This facilitates crossfile searching and
number searching in general. Because of these reasons, it is and has
been our intention to use the Derwent format in all the patent databases
on Orbit and only the most recent Germany priorities have been the
exception.
We are currently using the Derwent format for the new Japanese B2
Grants in the INPADOC database, and are using the Derwent format for
the new German priority patents in the recently reloaded CLAIMS file.
We are on top of these changes and most recently we reported to
INPADOC that there were mistakes in the format of the new Japanese
B2 grants - they are correct now.
David T. Dickens
Manager, Online Products and Customer Support