Patents Cross-references

The material presented here is a compilation obtained by critically screening approximately 20,000 references from the literature (mainly from the Petroleum Abstracts Data Base and Patent Data Bases). Only materials that are accessible to the public have been included. The literature was screened from a chemist s point of view. Unfortunately several papers and patents did not disclose the chemical nature of the additives that are proposed for certain applications. In most cases it was not possible to learn the components by looking up cross-references and other sources. Papers of this kind are useless and have been omitted from the reference list. Research and procedures that are obviously not working, as well as wonder additives that are supposedly good for everything you can imagine, have also been left out. 

Both personal and corporate names are included. The name of the first author is linked with the title of the original document or patent. Coauthors are cross-referred to the name of the first author. 

Each patent number is followed by either a CA abstract number and a complete history of all equivalent documents, or a cross-reference to the patent number of the first abstracted patent in the patent family. This feature of the index, detailing a patent family, is the CA Patent Concordance. 

After several days of conscientious looking, reading, and note-taking, the searcher s spirits rise, as he flips feverishly through the last ten patents of his last subclass. The next to the last patent is a cross reference, in a subclass he hasn t yet searched. The manual and the definition indicate it should not be overlooked. Oh well, just one more subclass, says he, as he strides confidently toward the proper stack. But all too often, it is one of those subclasses that extend from the top to the bottom of the stack and into the next row—which can well be expected to evoke the well-known comment from those skilled in the art, There must exist some substantially more facile means for deriving adequate sustenance. ... 

After the index of earlier searches and special indexes have been checked, the files of patents and the cross-reference file of abstracts are systematically searched in selected subclasses of the United States classification system (3) and the Netherlands system (5). If too many patents appear to be pertinent, a conference with the patent attorney may be needed to narrow the field to be searched. Upon completion of the search, the patents are arranged in numerical order by countries and sent to the patent attorney together with a report in which the sources searched and the pertinent patents found are listed. If a large number of... 

Reference to the classification manual reveals class 260, and subclasses 449, 449.5, and particularly 449.6, which are directly pertinent to Dr. Doe s problem. More subclasses may, perhaps, be selected from the manual. In going through the patents in any particular subclass the searcher will find cross-reference patents from other classes. These often reveal important classes to search which had not appeared obvious from the list of classes in the manual. Sometimes, too, additional classes to be searched are located by looking up the classification of a relevant patent which has been discovered by accident or recalled from memory. 

The U. S. Patent Office provides several guides for obtaining those patents of interest. These are the Manual of Classification of Patents (117), the index to said manual, plus a series of classification bulletins which define the classes and subclasses listed in the manual. Once having determined the subclasses of interest, one may obtain from the Patent Office, at a charge of about 20 cents a page, separate numerical lists of both the original references and cross references in each subclass. Furthermore, the Patent Office will supply these lists of subclasses and cross-reference lists upon receiving a request which fully describes the subject matter of interest. The subclasses of Class 260, The Chemistry of Carbon Compounds, are the subclasses of main interest, and these have been recently revised. The definitions for Class 260 are in Classification Bulletin No. 200 (116). It may be noted at this time that a revised copy of this bulletin, as well as a new index to the Classification Manual, is scheduled for publication in the near future. 

Essential oils have been widely investigated in the medical field for their effect on brain and heart and the therapeutic benefits they deliver. They have been used for centuries by the Chinese, Egyptians, Greeks, and others and are well covered in the patent literature. A U.S. patent by Fletcher et al. [27] presents a good cross-reference for essential oils. 

Class 977 is a cross-reference collection patents are first placed in other categories and then provided a secondary nanotechnology classification. The Class only includes engineered nanoscale materials, not incidental or natural ones. By June 2006, there were 4800 patents in Class 977. The Class employs examiners from many different backgrounds. One estimate places the number of USPTO examiners used to assist with Class 977 at approximately 300 (Mouttet, 2005). The Class is designed to help examiners and attorneys search the prior art/literature for nanotechnology patents which would be otherwise scattered through numerous classes. 

The literature before 1967 is included retrospectively in the database CAOLD, which, in the meantime, contains 700,000 references to 1.4 million substances, which were mentioned before 1967, and 152.000 references to patents. For this database Chemical Abstracts Service scans bit by bit the Formula Index of the Sixth (1957-1961) and the Seventh (1962-1966) Collective Period. Therefore only substance references are contained in this database with no text information or even abstracts. However, cross-references to patents are marked with P. Using this database you have to consider that the chemical nomenclature in those days was quite different to the names in use today. Therefore an online search in CAOLD should be proceded by a search in the Registry File (Sect. 7.6) and then continued with the appropriate CAS Registry Number in CAOLD. 

Figure 12 shows that the Japanese patent has the priority but the patent publication had not arrived at Chemical Abstracts Service at the time the abstract was written about the European patent. The situation is particularly difficult with American patents because under US patent law there is only one step after application Only when the patent is granted is the document published (see example in Sect. 2.6). That means, if a US patent document is cited everybody knows that the patent has been granted. In all other patent processes the patent document will be published as an application and later once again when it is granted. With a European patent application the priority has to be named -this gives, in the case of a patent family, the cross-reference to the parent patent - and will be cited in the corresponding CA abstracts. 

Each Section ends with a list of cross-references to other Sections and abstracts of related interest. The cross-references are arranged in the order of Section numbers, but subdivided to indicate whether they are patent or other abstracts. 

Cross-reference to a patent family The German patent belongs to a patent family of which the Japanese patent was abstracted in an early Chemical Abstracts issue. This entry indicates that the application of the German patent was sent to the Chemical Abstracts Service during the preparation period of that particular Chemical Abstracts issue. 

Chapter 31 provided that anyone could request the Patent Office at any time to reexamine an issued patent by citing new references. Written arguments could be submitted, the patentee could narrow his claims, and the Patent Office would reexamine the patent in the light of this new information. If, during litigation, the validity of a patent were attacked because of new references that weren t before the Patent Office, Chapter 31 required that this too go to the Patent Office for reexamination and for an advisory opinion by the examiner. This is based on the statistic that somewhat over 70% of the patents that the courts have held invalid over the past few years were held invalid on the basis of references that were not before the Patent Office, and presumably if the Patent Office had had the references, they would not have issued the patent. Reexamination under Chapter 31 would be limited to published references, and thus there would be no need for discovery or depositions or cross-examination. It would be an inexpensive procedure that would cover almost all of the reasons for invalidity that could arise in a fullblown opposition proceeding. 

Drugs Under Patent. 1989-. Gaithersburg, MD FOI Services Annual. This hardcopy reference book provides an annual, cumulative list of drugs under patent, based on NDA and SNDA patent references pubfished in the previous year s Orange Book. Typically covering more than 2500 products, the list is conveniently cross-referenced through several separate indexes company, brand name, nonproprietary name, dosage form, NDA nmnber, exclusivity code, patent number, and patent expiration date. 

The first example is a technology originally patented by S. Suzuki et al., Hitachi Ltd., Japan [49]. Their solution for absolute pressure sensors, as well as for relative pressure sensors, is shown in a cross-sectional view in Figure 5.1.15. The piezoresistive silicon sensor element is anodically bonded to a thick glass part that constitutes the vacuum reference volume in the absolute pressure sensor or that contains a hole as a pressure inlet port for the relative pressure sensor. The pressure sensor die is typically housed in a cavity package with pressure inlet ports as part of the body. The surface of the sensor element is usually protected with a gel or other flexible material for corrosion resistance. 

---