This is 상윤 강's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following 상윤 강's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
상윤 강
Recent Activity
I think I can give a comment for your guess because I have worked at Korean Patent firm and now work at U.S. Law firm (Lowe Hauptman Ham & Berner, LLP). I handled so many cases of Korean company (Samsung, LG, SK..so on). PPH is not a highest option. PPH needs a granted patent at Korea Patent Office (KPO), but, it is not sure when drafting. We can consider it later if the application is allowed. Further, PPH filing needs an additional fee which includes drafting claim mapping chart fee. Thus, PPH is not widely used in Korea for U.S. filing, and is not considered when drafting Korean application claims. To avoid a burden of additional fees, almost out-going applications just use regular process. However, i) very important invention, ii) already granted at KPO, ii) needed to get a patent right ASAP, our client requests using PPH. I remember only under 5% of the out-going application used PPH process.
1 reply
Oh, I think this place is more proper than above for my reply..I'm re-writing my reply. I'm a Korean patent attorney. In my case, PPH is quite useful for Korean applicants who granted their patent in Korea. Although it is true that claims for the rest of the world are usually sub-optimal for the USA, we can revise claims according to the country. PPH regulation requires "sufficiently correspond" of the claims, not "exactly correspond." Since the invention is the same one, certain revising is accepted by USPTO, EPO, JPO, by such as a preliminary amendment. In my case, I didn't got a serious problems about the amending claims according to the nature of the patent office when I use PPH. Thus, we can revise claims for max-optimal.
1 reply
I'am a Korean patent attorney. In my case, PPH is quite useful for Korean applicants who granted their patent in Korea. Although it is true that claims for the rest of the world are usually sub-optimal for the USA, we can revise claims according to the country. PPH regulation requires "sufficiently correspond" of the claims, not "exactly correspond." Since the invention is the same one, certain revising is accepted by USPTO, EPO, JPO. Thus, we can revise claims for max-optimal.
1 reply
with respect to last post related to the AE and PE (http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2011/10/guest-post-accelerated-examination-and-prioritized-examination.html), it is stated that PE fee includes publication fee $300, but AE fee does not include the publication fee. Is there any reason for this difference?
1 reply
상윤 강 is now following The Typepad Team
Dec 30, 2012