Still: IMHO the TD in scenario one is not ineffective, it is a nullity ab initio. If anyone is awake at the Office, the error should be noticed and the TD not entered/accepted, forget the right word (but TDs are often so oft routine, I could forgive oversight). I guess that, in principle, I could agree that my patent only lives as long as your patent. But, absent a PoA, I have no authority to encumber property that is not my own. I wouldn't loose sleep over the screw-up in the first scenario. File a supplemental, explain the scrivner's error, roll over, go back to sleep. The second scenario? More interesting. No question of owner's power to act. But - with no authority on point - a agree w/ JimIvey, it should be correctable. Did your R111 Reply recite the correct patent number in the "remarks"? I don't know if the analogy is on point, but I took over a case. The FH had a R132 Dec w/ incorrect data - slipped decimal point - inventor's fault - on which the Office relied. I was able to "fix" it (phew). Even with the decimal point in the correct place, the conclusion from the data was still "supported" - albeit not as strongly convincing. If one can fix something as IMO serious as this - implicating inequitable conduct, perjury, etc., one should be able to correct a simple "typo"