Valid signature question

[MYK]

Is an electronically drawn signature on a PDF form considered valid?

If it is only part of a name, but is intended as the inventor's signature, is that valid?

[NJ Patent1]

"Electronically drawn"?  Do you mean an image of a signature that is pasted onto a doc, or something drawn with a stylus on, say, a tablet?  If the former,  I (think I) know what it is not (assuming we're talking about a substantive doc submitted to USPTO).  It is not a traditional /s-signature/, and it is not a pen-and-ink signature, just a facsimile of one.  I'm not aware of other options.  If it is a doc the validity of which is a matter of state law, say an assignment, it might be valid if it could be proved that the signatory herself placed the image on the document and doing so evinced assent or present intention to be bound.  Maybe particular state statutory or common laws might provide for this. 

If the latter, I still don't know for sure.  In "today's world" it would make sense if it were valid, and would be convenient for someone who has to chase signatures all over the place.  But (for US) I have the "best evidence rule" in back of head.  What is the "original"?  The stored PDF or a print-out of it?  The potential number of print-outs is unlimited.  Maybe there is something in the FRE or FRCP of which I am not aware.

Bottom line; "maybe"   

[JimIvey]

"Electronically drawn"?  Do you mean an image of a signature that is pasted onto a doc, or something drawn with a stylus on, say, a tablet?  If the former,  I (think I) know what it is not (assuming we're talking about a substantive doc submitted to USPTO).  It is not a traditional /s-signature/, and it is not a pen-and-ink signature, just a facsimile of one.  I'm not aware of other options.  If it is a doc the validity of which is a matter of state law, say an assignment, it might be valid if it could be proved that the signatory herself placed the image on the document and doing so evinced assent or present intention to be bound.  Maybe particular state statutory or common laws might provide for this. 

Aren't facsimiles of pen/ink signatures valid in the PTO?  I know the PTO accepts faxed and scanned signed pages.  Oh, maybe the PTO requires the document to be signed in ink and then only a correct and true facsimile/scan of the document would be acceptable.

If the latter, I still don't know for sure.  In "today's world" it would make sense if it were valid, and would be convenient for someone who has to chase signatures all over the place.  But (for US) I have the "best evidence rule" in back of head.  What is the "original"?  The stored PDF or a print-out of it?  The potential number of print-outs is unlimited.  Maybe there is something in the FRE or FRCP of which I am not aware.

As a practical matter, these types of signatures have been accepted for credit card purchases for decades.  I would think that such would only happen if all, or at least most, states accept that as a valid signature, though now it occurs to me that, in the credit card service contract, you might just agree that such a signature is legally binding.

Here's what 37 CFR 1.4 says about handwritten signatures:

(d)

    (1) Handwritten signature. Each piece of correspondence, except as provided in paragraphs (d)(2), (d)(3), (e) and (f) of this section, filed in an application, patent file, or other proceeding in the Office which requires a person's signature, must:
        (i) Be an original, that is, have an original handwritten signature personally signed, in permanent dark ink or its equivalent, by that person; or
        (ii) Be a direct or indirect copy, such as a photocopy or facsimile transmission (§ 1.6(d)), of an original. In the event that a copy of the original is filed, the original should be retained as evidence of authenticity. If a question of authenticity arises, the Office may require submission of the original.

As for tablet signatures, I don't see why that wouldn't be (i) handwritten and (ii) the equivalent of permanent dark ink.

I have a hard time seeing how inserting a scanned signature would satisfy 1.4(d).  However, I know at least one practitioner who has done exactly that on all his filed papers (not forms) for years without any problems.  It doesn't include the forward slashes required by 1.4(d)(2) for s-signatures.  So, maybe signature requirements aren't enforced particularly strictly, at least for registered practitioners. 

Regards.

[MYK]

Thanks;  this is indeed a signature that was drawn on a tablet.  I don't think it is one that he has cut-and-pasted.

As I've mentioned before, I'm in Taiwan, and here they don't usually sign an ink signature on documents -- they use a "chop" stamp, which is usually either hand-carved or (nowadays) milled with a CNC router from a layout that was partly hand-generated.  So, in addition to it not complying with local practice on "signatures", it is also only the inventor's first name (transliterated to English).  No family name, and it's not the Chinese characters.

It would be like Jim scrawling "Jim" on a document as a signature.  Potentially valid, since it was intended as a signature, and done by the signer himself.  I'm thinking about our current SecTreas who signs with a bunch of loops because his nickname is "Loopy" even though his name is Jacob L. Lew:

http://news.yahoo.com/treasury-secretarys-loopy-signature-improving-230258976.html

Nobody complains about Lew's "loopy" signature, but I'm a little worried about this inventor's transliterated-first-name-only-on-tablet signature.

[JimIvey]

Thanks;  this is indeed a signature that was drawn on a tablet.  I don't think it is one that he has cut-and-pasted.

As I've mentioned before, I'm in Taiwan, and here they don't usually sign an ink signature on documents -- they use a "chop" stamp, which is usually either hand-carved or (nowadays) milled with a CNC router from a layout that was partly hand-generated.  So, in addition to it not complying with local practice on "signatures", it is also only the inventor's first name (transliterated to English).  No family name, and it's not the Chinese characters.

It would be like Jim scrawling "Jim" on a document as a signature.  Potentially valid, since it was intended as a signature, and done by the signer himself. 

Of course, an "X" is a valid signature in the US.  That gets me thinking.  I remember a lot of documents requiring signatures of witnesses.  If someone signs an "X", it makes sense that you'd need some witnesses as to whose "X" that is.

Someone who performs a similar witnessing service today in the time of great literacy is a notary public.  Is there something like that in Taiwan?  Many offices of a moderate to large size include notaries who could witness the signing and completely identify the person signing. 

I'm not sure that's necessary, but it could be helpful in some cases.

Since this is a USPTO form, you probably won't be able to add notary or other witness stuff to it.  I'd retain e-mails of the transaction to show that the form was sent to the inventor unsigned and returned, by the inventor, signed.  Even if the signature is accepted by the PTO, it might be challenged in court -- and that can be a problem if the signing inventor is no longer available.

Regards.

[MYK]

Of course, an "X" is a valid signature in the US.  That gets me thinking.  I remember a lot of documents requiring signatures of witnesses.  If someone signs an "X", it makes sense that you'd need some witnesses as to whose "X" that is.

Someone who performs a similar witnessing service today in the time of great literacy is a notary public.  Is there something like that in Taiwan?  Many offices of a moderate to large size include notaries who could witness the signing and completely identify the person signing. 

I'm not sure that's necessary, but it could be helpful in some cases.

Since this is a USPTO form, you probably won't be able to add notary or other witness stuff to it.  I'd retain e-mails of the transaction to show that the form was sent to the inventor unsigned and returned, by the inventor, signed.  Even if the signature is accepted by the PTO, it might be challenged in court -- and that can be a problem if the signing inventor is no longer available.

Regards.

Thanks, Jim.  It's actually a combined Declaration-Assignment contract, not an official SB/XX, so we could get it notarized.  (I didn't know that USPTO forms aren't supposed to get notarized!  Noted and logged!)  I also have the emails both sent-unsigned and received-signed.  There are notaries here;  I'm not sure what the formalities are (probably have to go in person).

I guess I'm comfortable with it complying with the USPTO's wants, but I should ask around here to make sure it's valid under Taiwan's laws.  Everyone's employment contracts have assignment clauses, of course, but again, I should look into how the courts treat those if someone disputes signing, etc.

[JimIvey]

(I didn't know that USPTO forms aren't supposed to get notarized!  Noted and logged!)

Oooh...  Don't rely on me for that.  I just don't remember seeing a place on a USPTO form that allows for a notary seal/statement.  And, you're not supposed to modify the official forms.  If you do, you're supposed to remove the form number designation so the Office knows that it might not be what it looks like.

However, it's not impossible that a USPTO form would leave a space for notarization -- explicitly or implicitly.  I guess one question might be whether a notary's rubber stamping and signature in any white space on a PTO form not explicitly reserved for notarization would be a "modification" of the form.  I wouldn't think it would be as long as the original text of the form is all there and unmodified.

Regards.

[NJ Patent1]

Interesting and a quite practical thread for "today's world".  Guess I'll recant a little bit on the cut-and-pasted signature (indirect copy) if placed there by the signatory, but not loving it in view of language quoted by JI.  The "tablet" part gives me the most (unfounded?) concern.  For credit cards (I can never read my own signature), per JI that legality is most likely buried in "terms of service" and in the fact that I 'tap' on "I agree to pay ..."  US contract and UCC law.  For a scanned document I file with PTO, there is, somewhere, a document with blue-ink-signature-on-black-print "original" that would satisfy "best evidence" for a court (PTO too I sincerely hope, how does one file a physical piece of paper electronically?). 

As for this "stamp thing".  On a tablet?  How does one stamp a tablet?  Don't know about China.  But I've received a lot of original official paper communications from Japan that had an "artistic" stamp – always in red ink – but also had some "hen scratching" above a typed surname (e.g. "Yamamoto", not just "Kenjii").

To cut to chase, as I understand, in China folks don't "sign" docs, they just stamp them (in Germany I had to sign AND stamp "Dr. NJP1" underneath – German handwriting is difficult to decipher) in many court proceedings I might well argue stamp was enough to signify assent.  Before USPTO?  Nobody challenges?  No harm no foul.  Best NJP1

PS  JI is of course correct, SBs are not supposed to be changed w/o deleting verbage.  Use your own form.  I have filed "begluabigt" forms from DE concerns.  Hmmm. Can a Notar authenticate a signature that doesn't qualify as a signature?

[NJ Patent1]

I came across this in reading. http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6e599424-feda-4f28-b108-b9719cbf3eba  Has absolutely nothing to do with US-centric OP.  But similar concerns could surface elsewhere.   

[JimIvey]

As for this "stamp thing".  On a tablet?  How does one stamp a tablet?  Don't know about China.  But I've received a lot of original official paper communications from Japan that had an "artistic" stamp – always in red ink – but also had some "hen scratching" above a typed surname (e.g. "Yamamoto", not just "Kenjii").

This thread got me thinking about just that.  I have a friend/colleague/former client that has a number of patents for entry of non-alphabetic text (Chinese mostly).  I'll run some ideas by him.

The link to the article also got me thinking.  Probably the most secure and trustworthy signature is a cryptographic signature.  I wonder if and when the PTO would accept those.

And, I think the best solution to the problem just popped into my head.  If the inventor swiped his finger over the tablet to sign the document, why couldn't the inventor just add text to the signature line and type "/Jim/"?  or even scrawl "/Jim/"?  As long as the slashes are there, I think the PTO will accept it as a signature.  Just add the slashes.

Regards.

[MYK]

As for this "stamp thing".  On a tablet?  How does one stamp a tablet?  Don't know about China.  But I've received a lot of original official paper communications from Japan that had an "artistic" stamp – always in red ink – but also had some "hen scratching" above a typed surname (e.g. "Yamamoto", not just "Kenjii").

Well, I have a Hello Kitty sticker on the back of my laptop. . . .  That's sort of similar.

But for applying a stamp here, the inventor would have to print the form, physically stamp the paper, and then scan it.  I think I've seen documents that have a cut-and-pasted "stamp" on them, but I don't know how that is counted.

I still haven't found anyone locally who can answer;  my go-to Foreign Legal Adviser (an American who's been here for around thirty years working at a local biglaw) is out of the country at the moment.  Sigh.