Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[JimIvey]

I accept email submissions prior to issuance.  I will conveniently stumble across art you recommend in my next search.  Though you can't look up the examiner via public pair for non-published applications. 

Isn't this illegal? 

"Illegal" is a bit strong, isn't it?  I don't think the examiner would do jail time.  However, I agree that it's contrary to the rules and probably shouldn't be done.

Having said that, I'd rather have all the relevant art on the record and deal with it in the PTO than to have it brought to my attention when there's nothing I can do about it. 

I don't condone rule-breaking and I don't condone what JAE describes, but there are worse evils in the PTO in my opinion.

Regards.

[Isaac]

"Illegal" is a bit strong, isn't it?  I don't think the examiner would do jail time.  However, I agree that it's contrary to the rules and probably shouldn't be done.

Maybe.  I don't think illegal necessarily means a criminal statute is involved.

Having said that, I'd rather have all the relevant art on the record and deal with it in the PTO than to have it brought to my attention when there's nothing I can do about it.

Exactly so.   I was irked by the apparent solicitation of improper for emailed references, but what is an examiner supposed to do if he learns of a reference through an improper channel?  Ignoring it seems wrong.

[JimIvey]

I don't think illegal necessarily means a criminal statute is involved.

I do.  I think of civil issues as "legally actionable". 

Perhaps I tend to over-react as I often hear software types shout "coding is not a crime!" to protest software patents. 

But I understand that not everyone thinks the same way I do.

Ignoring it seems wrong.

Fair enough.

Regards.