Israel Patent 169498 to Vacu Vin Innovations titled “pourer” is another case where the patent lapsed due to fee not having been paid. Here the patentee claims to have paid the publication fee in a timely manner and claims that proof of payment was submitted to the Israel Patent Office. However, patentee and agent couldn’t prove that the proof of payment was submitted to the patent office.
The renewal should have been paid in December 010, and the patent lapsed six months later, and the fact that it had lapsed was published in the July 2013 journal. Close to paying the third renewal, the patentee learned that the patent had lapsed.
Deputy Commisioner Ms Jacqueline Bracha allowed the patent to be published for reinstatement.
This decision is similar to another we reported recently. There the renewal was paid on line but papers weren’t sent to the patent office. Here patentee claims that he did send proof, but neither patent office nor patentee have record of this. In the other case, the patentee requested correction of the register. The patent was published for reinstatement. Here there was no attempt to have the register corrected. Reinstatement was requested and allowed.