IPC Prediction of Patent Documents Using Neural Network with Attention for Hierarchical Structure

International patent classifications (IPCs) are assigned to patent documents; however, since the procedure for assigning classifications is manually done by the patent examiner, it takes a lot of time and effort to select some IPCs from about 70,000 IPCs. Hence, some research has been conducted on patent classification with machine learning. However, patent documents are very voluminous, and learning with all the claims (the part describing the content of the patent) as input would run out of the necessary memory. Therefore, most of the existing methods learn by excluding some information, such as using only the first claim as input. In this study, we propose a model that considers the contents of all claims by extracting important information for input. We also propose a new decoder that considers the hierarchical structure of the IPC. Finally, we evaluate the model using an evaluation index that assumes the actual use of IPC selection for patent documents.

When do the USPTO examiners cite as the EPO examiners? An analysis of examination spillovers through rejection citations at the international family-to-family level

This paper empirically examines coincidences between “rejection citations” (i.e., those cited as grounds for rejections) added by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and “X/Y patent citations,” which are also added as grounds for rejections at the European Patent Office (EPO) within the same patent family, based on more than forty thousand families of triadic application sample. We consider the release timing of European search reports and the timing of rejection actions by the USPTO for the same family of patent applications. We find that the frequency of rejection (X/Y-equivalent) citation coincidences between the USPTO and the EPO according to family-to-family citation criteria increases after the release of search reports by the EPO. It suggests that the US examiners capture spillovers of search efforts from the EPO, namely, the USPTO examiners rely on prior art information collected and disclosed by the EPO. The results also reveal that International Search Reports (ISRs) prepared for Patent Corporation Treaty (PCT) applications, as well as applicant-submitted citations, play important roles for the convergence of rejection citations between the two patent offices. We furthermore find that the US examiners are less likely to add the same patent citations as the EPO examiners when rejections are persistently repeated at the USPTO. The methodology in this paper introduces the novel use of patent examiner citations to compare examiners’ citing behavior across jurisdictions.

Chemists Who Work for the National Labs or Other Federal Agencies

Dr. Patricia Carter Sluby (Fig. 5.1) is a primary patent examiner retired from the US Patent and Trademark Office and formerly a registered patent agent. She is also the author of three books about African American inventors and their patented inventions. Patricia’s father is William A. Carter Jr., and her mother is Thelma LaRoche Carter. Her father was the first black licensed master plumber in Richmond, VA, and his father also had the same distinction in Columbus, OH, years earlier. Her father was born in Philadelphia, PA, and attended college. Her grandfather went from Virginia to look for work in Canada and became a stonemason. Later he relocated back to the United States, where he soon married in Boston, MA, and several of his children were born there. Later, the family moved to Philadelphia where Patricia’s father was born. Her mother, who attended Hampton Institute, taught school and later managed the office for Patricia’s father’s business. Patricia’s mother was born and raised in Richmond, as were most of her maternal relatives. Patricia had three brothers. They were all born during segregation in Richmond, the former capital of the Confederacy. Patricia was born on February 15, in Richmond. She attended kindergarten through eighth grade in segregated schools that were within walking distance of home. In school, they studied from hand-me-down books, but her black teachers were well trained and well informed. They had bachelor’s degrees; some had master’s or even PhD degrees. To go to high school, Patricia took a city bus across to the east side of town, to the newly built school for black students, which incorporated eighth grade through twelfth grade. Her teachers were excellent instructors who lived in her neighborhood and knew her parents quite well. The teachers looked out for the neighborhood kids and acted as surrogate parents out­side the confines of the home. Teachers and principals were also great mentors, dedicated to their craft; they encouraged students to understand the world and function as responsible adults. Patricia excelled in science and math.

Invalidity and Amendment of Granted Patents

This chapter focuses on the law governing the validity and amendment of patents in the UK and US. The grant of a patent does not guarantee its validity. The chance that a patent will be held to be valid if challenged depends on the completeness of the search performed; the strictness of examination of the patent in the patent office; the legal and technical competence of the patent examiner; the chance of intervention by third parties during the patent office proceedings; and the pro- or anti-patent attitude of the national courts. Patents granted by the European Patent Office (EPO), Japanese Patent Office, or US Patent and Trademark Office are subject to a relatively rigorous substantive examination. However, patents in other countries, such as South Africa, Belgium, or even the Netherlands, are granted after a formal examination, without any investigation as to whether the claimed invention meets the patentability criteria.