Search found 97 matches
- Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:59 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: Expiry date of patents (l513ep)
- Replies: 1
- Views: 1889
Re: Expiry date of patents (l513ep)
I don't have access to TLS221_INPADOC_PRS, so I can not look into this myself. But have you checked Espacenet? It has a INPADOC legal status link. Just put http://worldwide.espacenet.com/ in front of the `appln_nr_epodoc` to go directly to the patent. Btw, the patent you mentioned is a US patent? It...
- Fri Feb 21, 2014 6:50 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: Help with backward citations and patent counts
- Replies: 1
- Views: 2737
Re: Help with backward citations and patent counts
Regarding your first question: SELECT YEAR(`tls201_appln`.`appln_filing_date`), COUNT(*) FROM `tls201_appln` INNER JOIN `tls224_appln_cpc` ON `tls201_appln`.`appln_id` = `tls224_appln_cpc`.`appln_id` WHERE `cpc_class_symbol` LIKE "Y02E__10/5%" OR `cpc_class_symbol` LIKE "H02N___6%&quo...
- Thu Feb 06, 2014 2:17 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: PATSTAT vs Espacenet
- Replies: 0
- Views: 2495
PATSTAT vs Espacenet
See http://worldwide.espacenet.com/GB20040015870. It's a rucksack, by a Simon Stewart Mitchinson. He's both inventor and applicant. The same patent in PATSTAT October 2013 has appln_id 21451471. In PATSTAT there is no inventor listed, and no IPC classes. Just to be on the safe I also checked TLS222,...
- Thu Jan 30, 2014 9:51 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: European patent applications?
- Replies: 1
- Views: 2338
Re: European patent applications?
For example, what query was used to get the numbers as reported on http://www.epo.org/about-us/annual-repo ... lings.html?
- Thu Jan 30, 2014 4:02 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: Table PERS_APPLN : violation of primary key, errors?
- Replies: 1
- Views: 1891
Re: Table PERS_APPLN : violation of primary key, errors?
From the documentation: " Conceptually, the combination of PERSON_ID and APPLN_ID should be unique. In practice, due to duplicates in the source data also the attributes APPLT_SEQ_NR and INVT_SEQ_NR must be part of the Primary Key. " So they are aware of the issue, but just haven't correct...
- Sat Jan 25, 2014 9:36 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
- Replies: 5
- Views: 6158
Re: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
The documentation also gives the following description for DOCDB_FAMILY_ID and INPADOC_FAMILY_ID: " Means that most probably the applications share exactly the same priorities (Paris Convention or technical relation) as in table TLS204_PRIOR_APPLN and TLS205_TECH_REL and tls216_APPLN_CONTN . &q...
- Sat Jan 25, 2014 12:39 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: European patent applications?
- Replies: 1
- Views: 2338
European patent applications?
Eurostat publishes some data regarding "European patent applications". European patent applications refer to applications filed directly under the EPC or to applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and designated to the EPO (Euro-PCT). Patent applications are counted ac...
- Sat Jan 11, 2014 5:47 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
- Replies: 5
- Views: 6158
Re: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
Thanks Martin. Self-priority makes sense. I suppose these are excluded from TLS204 to save space? E.g. instead of including a record where appln_id=1234 and prior_appln_id=1234 we now have the rule that if appln_id isn't there, it's a priority. Instead we could have had the rule that if appln_id = p...
- Tue Jan 07, 2014 6:23 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
- Replies: 5
- Views: 6158
Re: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
Hi Martin, My problem actually is with the statement that " if two applications claim exactly the same prior applications as priorities (these can be Paris Convention priorities or just technical relation priorities), then they are defined by the EPO as belonging to the same DOCDB simple family...
- Sat Jan 04, 2014 7:02 pm
- Forum: PATSTAT Product Line
- Topic: TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
- Replies: 5
- Views: 6158
TLS218_DOCDB_FAM
The TLS218_DOCDB_FAM table in PATSTAT October 2013 seems to be a bit off. The documentation states that: " Generally speaking, if two applications claim exactly the same prior applications as priorities (these can be Paris Convention priorities or just technical relation priorities), then they ...