One questions ask what to do with a PCT app where there were two missing parts of the spec, and the applicant filed them at two intervals. The international filing date will be the date the timely filed filed correction is received by the receiving office. MPEP 1810
Answer: There are only 30 days to do this, and so his 2nd submission was not entered.
Consult PCT Rule 20.6 for more details about this specific question, and 20.7 for the time limits for various other situations.
Also, How do you make corrections to a PCT application? Specifically, when and which office to use.
How, specifically do you correct?
So, in the above qs, if 2nd submission is not within 30 days- is the applicn abandoned? i.e. no filing date accorded since the spec wasn’t provided in a complete form.
The best answer I could find in 1810 was:
“If the defect under PCT Article 11(1) is not timely corrected, the receiving Office will promptly notify the applicant that the application is not and will not be treated as an international application”
In regards to not paying the fees on time, the MPEP is clearer and states that the app is “withdrawn.”
I don’t agree with this. First of All, Rule 20.6 has nothing to do with time limits. I think you meant Rule 26.
Both Rule 26 and Rule 20.7 set up a 2 months time limit from the date of the invitation…
20.6 Invitation to Correct
(a)
The invitation to correct under Article 11(2) shall specify the requirement provided for under Article
11(1) which, in the opinion of the receiving Office, has not been fulfilled.
(b)
The receiving Office shall promptly mail the invitation to the applicant and shall fix a time limit, reasonable under the circumstances of the case, for filing the correction. The time limit shall not be less than 10 days, and shall not exceed one month, from the date of the invitation. If such time limit expires after the expiration of one year from the filing date of any application whose priority is claimed, the receiving Office may call this circumstance to the attention of the applicant.
today, cannot be found
20.2 Receipt on Different Days
(a)
In cases where all the sheets pertaining to the same purported international application are not received on the same day by the receiving Office, that Office shall correct the date marked on the request (still leaving legible, however, the earlier date or dates already marked) so that it indicates the day on which the papers completing the international application were received, provided that
(i)
where no invitation under Article 11(2)(a) to correct was sent to the applicant, the said papers are received within 30 days from the date on which sheets were first received;
(ii)
where an invitation under Article 11(2)(a) to correct was sent to the applicant, the said papers are received within the applicable time limit under Rule 20.6;
(iii) in the case of Article 14(2), the missing drawings are received within 30 days from the date on which the incomplete papers were filed;
(iv)
the absence or later receipt of any sheet containing the abstract or part thereof shall not, in itself, require any correction of the date marked on the request.
(b)
Any sheet received on a date later than the date on which sheets were first received shall be marked by the receiving Office with the date on which it was received.
see oct.2003.pm
A registered practitioner files an international application submission that includes a description, claims and drawings in the United States Receiving Office (RO/US) on Wednesday, January 8, 2003. The submission did not include the required request, international and search fees, or the designation of a PCT contracting State. The RO/US mails an “Invitation to Correct the Purported International Application,” dated January 10, 2003, to the practitioner indicating that the designation of at least one Contracting State, as required by PCT Article 11(1)(iii)(b), was not included. A one-month period for response is set in the Invitation. On Monday, February 10, 2003, the practitioner submits by facsimile a designation sheet of the Request Form designating every available Contracting State, and authorization to charge all required fees. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, will the application be accorded an international filing date?
(A) Yes. The application will be accorded a filing date of January 8, 2003.
(B) Yes. The application will be accorded an international filing date of February 10,
2003.
(C) No. The application will not be accorded an international filing date because the
failure to designate at least one contracting State cannot be cured by a facsimile
transmission.
(D) No. The application was given a one-month period for response. The practitioner
would have had to have filed the response on Friday, February 7, 2003 in order to
have been timely.
(E) None of the above
Answer is (C) Can’t correct via facsimile
see oct.2003.pm
A registered practitioner files an international application submission that includes a description, claims and drawings in the United States Receiving Office (RO/US) on Wednesday, January 8, 2003. The submission did not include the required request, international and search fees, or the designation of a PCT contracting State. The RO/US mails an “Invitation to Correct the Purported International Application,” dated January 10, 2003, to the practitioner indicating that the designation of at least one Contracting State, as required by PCT Article 11(1)(iii)(b), was not included. A one-month period for response is set in the Invitation. On Monday, February 10, 2003, the practitioner submits by facsimile a designation sheet of the Request Form designating every available Contracting State, and authorization to charge all required fees. In accordance with the patent laws, rules and procedures as related in the MPEP, will the application be accorded an international filing date?
(A) Yes. The application will be accorded a filing date of January 8, 2003.
(B) Yes. The application will be accorded an international filing date of February 10,
2003.
(C) No. The application will not be accorded an international filing date because the
failure to designate at least one contracting State cannot be cured by a facsimile
transmission.
(D) No. The application was given a one-month period for response. The practitioner
would have had to have filed the response on Friday, February 7, 2003 in order to
have been timely.
(E) None of the above
Answer is (C) Can’t correct via facsimile
uuuhhh, not sure why the double post happened? Wish there was a way to delete your own post
To clarify:
1. The fees must be submitted in 1 MONTH
2. Missing parts in 2 MONTHS
THis is per 1801 (for fees, under RO)
and rule 20.7 for missing parts.
These revs are valid for the E8R8 revisions.
Nonetheless the filing date cannot be obtained by fax, so C in the prior questions will still remain the answer.
BUT NOTE THE CHANGES
Agree