The record
Timeline
A plain-language timeline of the key events.
-
December 2017
My provisional patent application filed
I filed my provisional application for the oil-well-pump instrumentation system and paid my own filing fee.
-
September 2018
Uh-oh — someone caught wind of my idea
A side-story in its own right; see Dispatch No. 4. Remember this one — it's material to the rest of the story.
-
December 2018
My non-provisional patent application filed
I filed my non-provisional application. This is the one I spent a lot of time on, way more than I should have.
-
July 2019
My application published
Published on USPTO.gov — the public disclosure the patent bargain requires. The very document the other side would go on to read and literally copy.
-
June 2021
My examiner asserts [non]prior art
You really need to read Dispatch No. 4 for this one, because it's actually not prior art for me, but I keep having to explain that.
-
April 2022
Crap, Big Corp is out marketing a product
I approached them to license my technology. They ignored me. I didn't know they had already executed Phase 1 by filing a plagiarized application (there's an 18-month publication window and so I assumed they filed something, but it wasn't published yet. Either way, I knew I filed first this time).
-
May 2022
My examiner asserts the same [non]prior art… again
See Dispatch No. 4. Heck, this one was a Final Rejection on me, so I knew Final isn't Final (see Dispatch No. 7 and Dispatch No. 8).
-
September 2022
My examiner asserts the same [non]prior art… yet again
See Dispatch No. 4. You do realize I got past this, so I was right about the priority dates.
-
August 2023
Where have I heard this before?
I found their application. I got to an oddly worded sentence and caught the déjà vu. Why does this awkwardly worded phrase sound so intimately familiar? Well, because I wrote it a couple of times. See Dispatch No. 5.
-
October 2023
Third-party preissuance submission
I filed a third-party preissuance submission against their application under 35 U.S.C. § 122(e) and 37 C.F.R. § 1.290 (MPEP § 1134.01), paying a third fee and thoroughly citing the prior art — including my own published application. See Dispatch No. 6.
-
November 2023
My patent issued
After three office actions over that not-actually-prior-art document, I prevailed and my patent issued. Proof the system can work — hold that thought.
-
June 2024
Big Corp's Office Action #1
The examiner clearly isn't reading the prior art… But I still have faith.
-
September 2024
Big Corp's Response to Office Action #1
In my opinion, this mischaracterized the prior art. I can point to misleading statements.
-
February 2025
Big Corp's Office Action #2 — Final Rejection
Again, it's clear the examiner still isn't reading the prior art, nor applying the relevant teachings (all of which I had pointed to in great detail)… But I'll take this win.
-
February 2025
My Letter to Big Corp
Hey, I'm the guy you copied, let's work this out. You just got a final rejection, this is a bad look for you, let's all just get along… I didn't think this would work (and it didn't), but it was worth yet another shot.
-
March 2025
Response letter from Big Corp's attorney
My characterization, not a quote: the gist I took from it was — you're accusing us of infringement (I wasn't... I explicitly said I wasn't). I was showing them copied text. You could say I was 'accusing' them of plagiarism, I suppose.
-
May 2025
Big Corp's Request for Continued Examination (RCE)
Pay the fee, reopen the case. The dead patent is not so dead. What I didn't expect was how fast it could spring back to life. See Dispatch No. 8 and Dispatch No. 9.
-
July 2025
Notice of Allowance
A rose by any other name… It's shocking how easy it is to shuck and jive a lazy examiner. See Dispatch No. 8 and Dispatch No. 9.
-
July 2025
5 days after the Notice of Allowance
The Big Corp acquisition (by an Even Bigger Big Corp) that was pending for over a year was finalized. Yes, 5 days earlier the examiner allowed the patent. I'm an engineer and I know correlation is not causation. What do you think?
-
Now
Post Grant Review — in preparation
Because the ordinary review failed, I'm left with the extraordinary one. Preparing the PGR petition. Sadly, on account of the burdensome fee, I might not have the resources to afford this. I might end up with the less appropriate but more affordable ex parte reexamination. Not because of merit, but because of financial concerns. That's a shame on the system that created this mess.
The PTAB remedy — priced out of reach.
More entries land here as the Post Grant Review progresses. Want the narrative version? Read the dispatches →