Print

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

[Monkey1]

I seem to remember there is a thread here where similar issues were discussed.  Issues of USPTO scanning in figures in a different resolution than submitted and getting rejections/objections based on the bad figures..  Does anyone know where that discussion thread is?

Thanks!

[dbmax]

Put "pdf drawings: in the search field and you'll see more than one discussion.

Not sure if any are what you remember.

DB

[af]

I seem to remember there is a thread here where similar issues were discussed.  Issues of USPTO scanning in figures in a different resolution than submitted and getting rejections/objections based on the bad figures..  Does anyone know where that discussion thread is?

Thanks!

I don't know if this is what you are looking for, but here is a thread discussing drawing problems caused by the drawings not being purely black and white. That is, if the drawing has even one pixel of gray tone, or color, the PTO will overlay a dot pattern on the drawings when they scan it in. See: http://www.intelproplaw.com/ip_forum/index.php/topic,15408.msg80106.html#msg80106

I hope this helps,
Alan

[dbmax]

What is the applicant's responsibility in the case of a scanning error by the PTO?

Deadlines? Post allowance correction?

DB

[af]

What is the applicant's responsibility in the case of a scanning error by the PTO?

Deadlines? Post allowance correction?

DB

I am not sure. Maybe someone else has more experience with this.

In my case; the PTO's position is that it is an applicant error (even though in my opinion, it is a problem with their translation software). I corrected the drawings by making that all the lines where pure black and submitted replacement drawings in an amendment. Note that in my case there was no pre-exam formalities rejection so my submission was purely voluntary.

Alan

[Yak]

The few times I have run into drawing problems, it was due to the draftsman using multiple layers in the original drawings and then simply turning the layers off and saving the drawing as a pdf.  The PTO told me that doing this can cause a problem when the pdf's are transferred to the format the examiner receives and that all drawings should be compressed to a single layer.  Luckily all of these issues have been caught by the technology center asking for corrected drawings, the examiner objecting to the drawings, or us during prosecution.  Each time it was easily corrected by submitting new drawings.

[JimIvey]

Thanks, Yak.

I use that technique myself and have never had problems.  I'm usually careful to remove the invisible layers as they include images that take a lot of space and slow upload times.  However, I can't say I'll never make a mistake.

Do you know if the top layer drawings show "on top" so that fixed drawings would be properly supported?  Or are examiners happy enough to have legible drawings to not play hardball over that issue?  In other words, should I be obsessive and compulsive about removing background layers or just reasonably conscientious and diligent?

Thanks.

[Yak]

Jim,
The handful of times I have encountered this, before realizing and ensuring all our pdf's were saved as a single layer, these were the most common situations.

1) the draftsman used a bracket, a border, or some other alignment tool while preparing the drawings and just turned off that layer.  These are the ones that make it to the examiner and get objections.  Typically easy to amend as a replacement sheet in response to the OA and I had no concerns about the amended drawing supporting the application.

2) the draftsman used a hand sketch or other image as a template while preparing the patent art and just turned off that layer.  These drawings are usually caught by the technology center and we got a notice to file corrected papers.  Although there have been instances where the messy drawings made it to examiner and were objected to.  The convolution of the drawings varies on how clear the drawings are.  Sometimes the template image is rotated 90 degrees and is right under the patent drawing making it almost impossible to tell what the drawing is. 

There is an application which just received a NOA.  Once it issues, if I remember, I will post the patent # and you can look at the PAIR images of the drawings which have an example of each type of the above noted errors. 

For those severe #2 cases, I would worry about the replacement sheets being supported by the original drawings.  However, my understanding is it this messy drawing are only the version the examiners see when the pdf is processed by the PTO into the image format used with the PAIR system.  The way it was explained to me by the Tech Center was that the original pdf drawings submitted are saved on a different system as the .pdf, so if support ever became an issue hopefully the applicant can rely on the pdf version and filing date but I have not encountered that yet. 

[JimIvey]

2) the draftsman used a hand sketch or other image as a template while preparing the patent art and just turned off that layer.  These drawings are usually caught by the technology center and we got a notice to file corrected papers.  Although there have been instances where the messy drawings made it to examiner and were objected to.  The convolution of the drawings varies on how clear the drawings are.  Sometimes the template image is rotated 90 degrees and is right under the patent drawing making it almost impossible to tell what the drawing is. 

That's the kind I do.  I would think the thick black lines on the top layer would stick out (I always have the sketch/photo in a background layer), especially since color results in black/white dithering in the PTO.  I guess if reference numerals and other things are over the dithered greys, they might be really hard to see.

One thing I don't quite understand, though.  Does the PTO use a different, unique PDF viewer?  If I view the PDF prior to uploading it, wouldn't I see the layers?  I'm not sure how the PTO could see layers in the PDF that I couldn't see.

Thanks.

[Yak]

If the underlying image were directly under the top layer, I think there wouldn't be much confusion.  For some reason, the template image was routinely rotated 90 degrees which, depending on the detail and number of reference numbers, got kind of messy. 

I don't completely understand it either, but the way it was explained to me was that the filed pdf is converted into a different file format for the examiners and then those files are then converted back to pdf's for PAIR.  If you open your originally submitted drawings, they look correct and you won't see the layers.  If you view/download the pdf in PAIR, it shows the messy image created during the file conversion.