PTAB Phantom Expanded Panels Erode Public Confidence and Essential Fairness

By Gene Quinn
March 22, 2018

PTAB Phantom Expanded Panels Erode Public Confidence and Essential FairnessIt would seem the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) sees nothing wrong with allowing any Administrative Patent Judges (APJs) to participate in the deliberative process of any inter partes review (IPR) even when those APJs have not been assigned to the three-member panel. This disturbing revelation about phantom expanded panels comes thanks to document production received in response to a FOIA request.

The first document in the heavily redacted production clearly shows an e-mail communication between APJ James Arpin (not assigned to the IPRs involving the RESTASIS patents) and APJ Sheridan Snedden (who was assigned to the IPRs involving the RESTASIS patents). The subject of the e-mail communication reads: “Tribal Immunity”, which makes it clear the two were discussing the RESTASIS IPRs. The e-mail body is redacted, so we don’t know what they were communicating about, but the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) claimed deliberative process privilege pursuant to section (b)(5) of the Freedom of Information Act.

What is an APJ not assigned to the cases doing deliberating with an APJ assigned to the panel that is to render a decision?

This revelation matters because the deliberative process privilege only shields information that is both “predecisional and a part of the deliberative process.” Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 20 F. Supp. 3d 260, 269 (D.D.C. 2014).

The USPTO justified its redaction under the deliberative process privilege because it “consist of opinions and recommendations regarding proposed agency actions”:

Here, the withheld information consists of opinions and recommendations regarding proposed agency actions, i.e., antecedent to the adoption of an agency position (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce, 337 F.Supp.2d 146, 172 (D.D.C. 2004)), and are deliberative, i.e., a direct part of the deliberative process in that it makes recommendations or expresses opinions on legal or policy matters.  Skinner v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 2010 WL 3832602 (D.D.C. 2010) (quoting Vaughn v. Rosen, 523 F.2d 1136, 1143-44 (D.C. Cir. 1975).  Facts expressed in these deliberative communications are not reasonably segregable, and thus are not suitable for disclosure.

In other words, the PTAB is admitting that APJs who were not assigned to a panel are, nonetheless, actively participating in “proposed agency actions” in those IPRs. In the case of the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe’s IPRs, APJ Arpin, who is not on the panel insofar as the public and parties are concerned, actively participated in the “deliberations” that led to Board’s decision to deny the Tribe’s Motion to Dismiss based on Tribal Sovereign Immunity.

If this practice of phantom expanded panels, with APJs not identified on the record or to the parties, is legal then IPR panel assignments are nothing more than a farce. Any APJ, including Chief Administrative Patent Judge Ruschke, can actively participate in the deliberative process of any IPR without ever disclosing that fact to the public or to the parties. So, in effect, all IPR panels may be secretly stacked!

[[Advertisement]]

An expanded panel under the PTAB’s Standard Operating Procedure 1 (revision 14)  would simply be a panel that the PTAB has decided to admit is stacked. But how many more phantom expanded panels — panels where the PTAB does not admit to stacking — exist?

Given these revelations it is no longer hyperbole to call the PTAB a Star Chamber. Those on the wrong end of the awesome power wielded by the PTAB have long claimed the tribunal was, in fact, a modern-day Star Chamber. But such a charge has largely been believed ridiculous; nothing more than sour grapes. But it does seem that the PTAB has evolved to become an administrative body with arbitrary rulings and secretive proceedings, the very definition of a Star Chamber.

Unfortunately, the PTAB’s position is not necessarily inconsistent with the statutory requirement that IPRs be heard by “at least” three-member panels assigned by the Director. See 35 U.S.C. § 6(c). And it also conforms with the PTAB’s definition “Panel” as “at least three members of the Board.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.2.

While expanded panels and the exerting of political pressure may be the new norm in order to prevent panels from issuing decisions that might be disfavored by PTAB and USPTO leadership, phantom expanded panels raise serious questions about compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).

If Lead APJs, the Chief Judge, Deputy Chief and Vice Chief Judges are engaging in secret deliberations with APJs assigned to cases (which we know they are because of the FOIA production) the independence of those APJs assigned to decide matters is seriously in question. What pressure must an APJ — many who are only senior associates at best — feel when they are engaging in secret, off-the-record deliberations with superiors? This just can’t be the level of judicial independence the APA requires, or the U.S. Constitution envisions.

“The APA creates a comprehensive bulwark to protect ALJs from agency interference,” Judge Kaufman explained in Nash v. Califano. “The independence granted to ALJs is designed to maintain public confidence in the essential fairness.”

The optics of this are terrible. Some 10 off-the-record communications between APJs — even APJs with supervisory authority — and those on panels deciding issues of State and Tribal Sovereign Immunity are known to exist. How many more exist in other cases?

For those searching for another possible, less nefarious explanation other than the existence of phantom expanded panels, the choices are few. Indeed, there really are only two possible interpretations of the documents disclosed by the USPTO: (1) Administrative Patent Judges not assigned to decide petitions are engaging in off-the-record, secret communications and deliberating as part of a phantom expanded panel; or (2) The USPTO is violating FOIA in an egregious and rather abusive manner (i.e., characterizing communications that are not deliberative as deliberative in order to refuse production of documents). Either is unacceptable, just for different reasons.

Because there is no reason at this juncture to question the propriety of the USPTO claiming deliberative privilege for hundreds of pages of communications, the only reasonable interpretation seems that APJs not assigned to these petitions are engaging as part of phantom expanded panels, where the collaboration of the APJs is not disclosed on the record, or to the parties.

Shockingly, there is nothing in PTAB Standard Operating Procedure 1 (revision 14) that requires notification to the parties that an expanded panel has been authorized, or even the names of those on expanded panels to be made of record. Thus, even despite the likelihood that phantom expanded panels do exist, the PTAB can say with all honesty that they faithfully carry out the dictates of their own Standard Operating Procedures, which is no doubt what they will say.

Of course, all of the APJs on the PTAB are employees of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, and bound by USPTO rules, regulations and laws pertaining thereto. The existence of phantom expanded panels would necessarily mean that those APJs ostensibly deciding cases insofar as the public and parties are concerned are violating 37 C.F.R. 1.2, which says:

All business with the Patent and Trademark Office should be transacted in writing. The personal attendance of applicants or their attorneys or agents at the Patent and Trademark Office is unnecessary. The action of the Patent and Trademark Office will be based exclusively on the written record in the Office. No attention will be paid to any alleged oral promise, stipulation, or understanding in relation to which there is disagreement or doubt.

Obviously, the consideration of deliberative correspondence from those not assigned to the case means the APJs are deciding cases not exclusively based on the written record. Thus, any way you slice this the PTAB seems to be violating one or more rules.

 

Image Source 123rf.com
Image ID: 14660876
Copyright: Gor Grigoryan

The Author

Gene Quinn

Gene Quinn is a Patent Attorney and Editor and President & CEO ofIPWatchdog, Inc.. Gene founded IPWatchdog.com in 1999. Gene is also a principal lecturer in the PLI Patent Bar Review Course and Of Counsel to the law firm of Berenato & White, LLC. Gene’s specialty is in the area of strategic patent consulting, patent application drafting and patent prosecution. He consults with attorneys facing peculiar procedural issues at the Patent Office, advises investors and executives on patent law changes and pending litigation matters, and works with start-up businesses throughout the United States and around the world, primarily dealing with software and computer related innovations. is admitted to practice law in New Hampshire, is a Registered Patent Attorney and is also admitted to practice before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. CLICK HERE to send Gene a message.

Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on IPWatchdog.com do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of IPWatchdog.com. Read more.

Discuss this

There are currently 41 Comments comments.

  1. Michael Shore March 22, 2018 11:11 am

    We have repeatedly called and sent communications via email to the PTAB/PTO attorney in charge of our FOIA request asking when we are going to receive additional documents. The lawyer’s name is Stephanie Baker. She works only Mondays, Wednesdays and every other Friday. That schedule makes it very difficult to communicate with her and apparently makes it very difficult for her to interact with PTAB on what objections they want to assert and what they are asking her to redact. I do not know if the assignment to Ms. Baker was intentional, designed to slow the process while our appeal and Oil States is pending, but it is maddening. She is very professional and courteous on the phone, but she is simply not getting the requests processed expeditiously as contemplated by the statute.

    Although the FOIA request has so far resulted in only 500 PAGES being produced (not 500 documents), we have been told by Ms. Davis that there are “several thousand” documents she is required to review and that she is working almost all of her time in the office on our FOIA requests. It seems pretty odd to me that a request that has been pending now for MONTHS has only resulted in 500 pages being produced, even when the lawyer in charge only works 20 hours or so a week. At the rate they are going, it seems they are spending about an hour per document. At that rate, it will take about 3 years to get the production finished — and of course it will be mostly blank, heavily redacted material that requires an administrative appeal, then a lawsuit to force actual compliance.

    PTAB is doing all it can to frustrate any review into their practices, any investigation into the due process violations in their handling of IPRs and any look into how politics affects, or infects their decision-making. The only reason we even made a FOIA request is that the Panel in our cases denied a request for discovery into any third party communications with the Panel on the substance of our cases. And they refused our discovery with a threat against my firm that any additional attempts at such discovery would result in sanctions. The response to that threat? Two FOIA requests.

    There is something seriously wrong at PTAB, and only Article III courts can put a stop to it. The Federal Circuit has some judges interested in the abuses at PTAB and those abuses’ adverse effects on the patent system. I encourage every patentee and lawyers to dig in and fight for your clients’ rights to a fair hearing before impartial non-political Panels. And if that is not guaranteed under the current system, to see that system massively reformed or better, abolished as unconstitutional.

  2. temprand March 22, 2018 11:35 am

    Mr. Shore – what sanctions does the PTAB have power to enforce? This has me worried, for a plethora of reasons.

  3. B March 22, 2018 12:41 pm

    “And they refused our discoveyr with a threat against my firm that any additional attempts at such discovery would result in sanctions. The response to that threat? Two FOIA requests”

    I am constantly amazed at how Michelle Lee took a dysfunctional organization and made it worse.

    —————

    ”There is something seriously wrong at PTAB, and only Article III courts can put a stop to it. The Federal Circuit has some judges interested in the abuses at the PTAB”

    I can name you three CAFC judges who could care less.

  4. Gene Quinn March 22, 2018 1:25 pm

    Michael Shore says: “I encourage every patentee and lawyers to dig in and fight for your clients’ rights to a fair hearing…”

    I personally think every patent owner facing a petition at the PTAB should be filing FOIA requests for documents that show or suggest there are phantom expanded panels deciding their cases.

    Shore says: “And they refused our discovery with a threat against my firm that any additional attempts at such discovery would result in sanctions.”

    Someone needs to file a petition for writ of mandamus. The PTAB threatening sanctions for zealously trying to represent a client is unconscionable. It is also utter ridiculous for a party to need to throw themselves on the mercy of the PTAB and ask for permission to file a motion. Who are these people? Did they learn anything about process and procedure in law school?

    We are constantly told that the PTAB is a district court alternative. You do NOT need to ask permission of the district court to file a motion. By refusing to allow motions to be filed at their arbitrary and capricious whim they are preventing the development of a record. This has to stop!

    Every patent owner should be filing petitions for a writ of mandamus. Sunlight needs to be brought to bear on these utterly unbelievable proceedings. To call the PTAB a kangaroo court doesn’t begin to capture what is really going on.

  5. Josh Malone March 22, 2018 1:57 pm

    The other problem is that the shadow panels are not there to help apply the law, but are there to pick the winners and losers and to promote policy that maximizes the agency power. The system is rigged to permit whatever outcome the shadow panel desires, regardless of the merits. 1) No presumption of validity, 2) preponderance of evidence, 3) subjective 103 analysis under KSR, and 4) (for PGR/CBM) subjective 112 analysis under Packard. These devices are manipulated to achieve whatever outcome the shadow panel wants. And even when there is no shadow panel, these devices are manipulated to meet the quota and maintain job security for the APJ’s. It is wonderful that the PTAB has reduced the kill rate in the past few months, but those decisions primarily rely on discretion, for instance denying institution under §325(d). But if the panel needs more work flow or if the shadow panel has it in for the patent owner, they will decline to exercise discretion.

  6. Josh Malone March 22, 2018 2:09 pm

    I forgot 5) flexible claim construction to read on prior art to reach the outcome dictated by the shadow panel or quota.

  7. AAA JJ March 22, 2018 2:18 pm

    The lifers at the PTO simply do not believe that the law applies to them. All of the outside APJ’s that were hired have been totally and completely corrupted by the lifer culture. From responding to persuasive evidence and arguments with form paragraph responses to their contempt for the statute, the rules, the law, their actions since being hired has done nothing but confirm their corruption.

  8. Michael Shore March 22, 2018 2:34 pm

    We moved for a stay of the IPR hearing at the PTAB pending the resolution of the appeal to the Federal Circuit, something we should not have to do since the appeal divested the Panel of ongoing jurisdiction. Instead of taking the April 3 date for the final argument off the calendar pending the decision on the motion to stay, they left it on so (I believe) they could drag out any decision until it was too late to seek a stay at the Federal Circuit before they had the hearing without us and thereafter issue a decision they have no jurisdiction to enter. So we gave them two days after the close of briefing to rule before filing an emergency motion for stay with the Federal Circuit. Briefing on the Federal Circuit stay motion will be complete this week, but now that our PTAB panel has had over a week to rule on a stay, they have declined to do so, confirming our suspicion that the Panel, or whoever is telling our Panel what to do, intended to moot the stay request by not ruling at all.

    How long does it take to decide and rule on whether an appeal divests a lower court of jurisdiction? A day? An hour? This is my first PTAB experience as counsel for a Respondent, and I am astounded about how the PTAB conducts itself.

  9. MD Hoyle March 22, 2018 2:37 pm

    Is a class action lawsuit possible? That’s the only thing that will pull these snakes from under the rocks, where they are hiding.

  10. Valuationguy March 22, 2018 3:32 pm

    Interestingly enough….Prof Crouch over at Patently-O is already revealing the pivot that the infringers are currently engaged in…..trying to justify the PTAB by now comparing it to OTHER administrative proceedings…without recognizing the KEY underlying issue that many administrative proceedings are justifiable under a strict reading of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    By possibly conceeding “one or two” “minor” weaknesses with the PTAB in relation to other admin adjudications…they hope to head off major changes which are needed.

    I read it as the efficient infringement lobby realizes that the upcoming retirement (voluntary or not) of many of their key go-to Congress critters is putting their gains of the past 8 years at high risk of reversals.

  11. Brian Buchheit March 22, 2018 4:03 pm

    Great article. It seems one of the problems with the phantom expanded panels is that it is done in secret so it is nearly impossible to bring a federal action on it. In general a participate in the controversy does not know it is occurring so no case can be brought. Is there a cause of action under state or federal law that could be personally brought against an administrative patent judge for a violation?

    I was also curious if anyone in this forum has considered bringing a challenge on the PTAB for the judges being improperly appointed principle officers per the logic of Prof. Gary Lawson. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3105511. If such an action is viable/possible, would such a challenge be able to be brought immediately to the Federal Circuit upon having a PTAB petition filed against you (since the judges are named at the time, but per the theory would lack proper appointment status as a decision maker) ? Could someone sue for damages over a canceled patent (by an IPR decision) or sue to revive a killed patent on the basis that the decision was made by an improperly appointed judge ?

  12. Dan Hanson March 22, 2018 5:12 pm

    I urge a note of caution. Individual judges (including Article III federal judges as well as state judges) often confer with their colleagues on the bench about legal issues. Some judges (as individuals and as members of panels) also rely heavily on the work of their law clerks. The judicial colleagues and law clerks are not deemed to be contributors to the deliberation nor are they deemed to be a part of some sort of secret deliberative body.

    Anyone who wants to argue to an Article III judge that the USPTO is acting incorrectly had better be careful not to suggest that the judge is likewise acting incorrectly.

  13. Bemused March 23, 2018 6:49 am

    Gene@4:

    “We are constantly told that the PTAB is a district court alternative”

    Kinda like death is an alternative to life, no?

    “To call the PTAB a kangaroo court doesn’t begin to capture what is really going on.”

    To call the PTAB a kangaroo court is insulting to kangaroos.

  14. Paul Morgan March 23, 2018 9:50 am

    If anyone actually dares to argue to the Fed. Cir., instead of on a blog, that APJ’s [or even examiners?] discussing novel legal issues with one another is a nefarious or somehow illegal activity, the Fed. Cir. response should be entertaining.

    BTW, for some historical context, for years and years Board [now PTAB] judges were called “Examiners in Chief” until their title was changed by statute to APJs. They were and are all attorneys, Also, there were two Boards, one for interferences and one for application claim rejection appeals. That was well before the AIA.

  15. Anon March 23, 2018 10:14 am

    Cheerleading Mr. Morgan (once again) misses the point.

    “On the record,” – Paul.

    Please pay attention.

    Your dust kicking and innuendo that “nothing is wrong here” is not helpful – and not believable.

  16. Chris Gallagher March 23, 2018 10:41 am

    Justice Gorsuch is on the record regarding his concern for the Chevron Doctrine’s administrative overreach. Oil States is still undecided. One can only hope that this Watchdog post, Quinn/Shore dialogue in its comments section, and Micheal Moore’s post earlier this week somehow reach his desk. SCOTUS appropriately engages in multi-justice dialogues. These wise comments about PTAB will add factual muscle to his concerns.

  17. Anon March 23, 2018 11:13 am

    The Supreme Court does not have to abide by 37 CFR 1.2 (or the APA).

    The PTAB does.

    I find it rather amazing that some actually want to clench tight their eyes and “see nothing amiss” here (much like those who saw nothing wrong with SAWS). These people are not friends of a healthy patent system. These people are anti-patent.

  18. David Hoyle March 23, 2018 11:32 am

    I found this link describing a 1994 case involving Patent office panel stacking.
    https://www.717madisonplace.com/?p=7673

    Has anyone read this case before? If so, does it cast anything to the current situation?
    Judge Meyer dissented with the En Banc and said the following, “however, I would still hold the Commissioner’s manipulation of the board illegal.”

    Seems to me she was right then and right today.

    I’m not an attorney. Rather, i’m just another victim steamrolled by the PTAB

  19. Gene Quinn March 23, 2018 11:53 am

    Dan @12-

    You raise a interesting and important caution.

    To clarify, I don’t think what you say district court judges do is in any way improper. The difference between a district court judge and a PTAB judge, however, is enormous. A district court judge has no boss and they have life tenure. There can be no exercise of influence over a district court judge by a superior. Chief Judge status is only for administration. District court judges are like CEOs in their own Chambers. Many of us with litigation experience know that they manage their docket how they want and they way they want. I’ve seen district court judges literally sit on a decision not ruling on a motion for over a decade (extreme I know, but it has happened).

    On the other hand, PTAB judges are clearly employees with bosses. They have a work production goal that they must meet. They are not given credit toward their work production for dissents unless permission to dissent is requested and granted. The hierarchy of the USPTO clearly shows that APJs answer to the Chief, who in turn answers to the Director of the USPTO. The PTAB are not independent, and historically great influence has been exerted on the PTAB by political powers within the USPTO.

  20. Gene Quinn March 23, 2018 11:56 am

    David @ 18-

    Most here are familiar with Alappat. It was an unfortunate procedural decision, but one that is different in many ways from what we are seeing now. If expanded panels are ever going to make sense they would make the most sense in ex parte appeals where the Office (i.e., Director) is trying to steer office policy on examination (which they have a right to do). The difference here is the PTAB is using expanded panels now with respect to contests between two litigants, and essentially predetermining what the outcome is that they prefer (i.e., who will win).

    Take a look at this post from August also on expanded panels. More to come.

    http://www.ipwatchdog.com/2017/08/23/uspto-admits-stacking-ptab-panels-achieve-desired-outcomes/id=87206/

  21. Paul Morgan March 23, 2018 1:55 pm

    CG, Oil States did not involved any alleged “reconsideration for reversal with a panel stacking” case*, or even a [statute allowed] expanded panel. So that issue is not even in consideration in Oil State. Even if it was the Sup. Ct. is not going to decided cases based on unsupported blog allegations.
    Also note that “reconsideration for reversal with a panel stacking” is logically inconsistent with other frequent comments here that APJs can be told what to decide. If APJ panels were not deciding cases independent of PTO management there would be no logical need to have them overruled by appointing other, additional, APJs to a reconsideration decision.
    Someone else asked about IPR party sanctions. That is provided right in the IPR statute.

    * So far, even after several blogs on that subject, only two or three actual such cases in Board history have yet to even be suggested. If it was not extremely rare many more should have been cited by now.

  22. Don Quixote March 23, 2018 3:12 pm

    Dan Hanson – really, what does your noting a general observation that the judges adhere to the norms of jurisprudence have to do with, systemically, leaving an open barnyard-door for corruption; which is what, as recognized through the ages, is represented by a complete lack of transparency? Was the US Constitution composed around such comfortable observations? I think not.

    Encouraging systemic corruption will reliably result in systemic corruption.

  23. Night Writer March 25, 2018 9:35 am

    Some of this Lemley talk is interesting. It makes me wonder how much of his career hasn’t been accelerated by Google. Looked in this light, Lemley is the chief puppet of Google. He has made 10’s of millions from pushing his anti-patent message and soiled forever the reputation of law professors and law journals. But, how much of this was fueled by Google bucks? All these law professors that have gotten their jobs through Lemley. Did Google give the universities money to take law professors that are anti-patent? Lemley was successful on the talk circuit,but was this too fueled by Google money?

  24. Night Writer March 25, 2018 10:02 am

    If I had to guess, I’d say that Google has been giving money to universities to hire anti-patent law professors. And they have used Lemley to pick them. This is consistent with the propaganda machine that is Google.

  25. Jeff Lindsay March 25, 2018 10:09 pm

    It’s only a matter of time before the Chinese government starts pointing to the kangaroo-court nature of the PTAB to mock America’s respect for IP in response to the charges we often make against them. The weakness, corruption, and lack of ethics in the PTAB and related problems in the USPTO not only undermines the rights of inventors, but also may impact our international credibility. Before we demand other nations do more to respect IP rights, perhaps we should treat the cancer in our own system.

  26. Joachim Martillo March 26, 2018 11:57 am

    Jeff Lindsay March 25, 2018 10:09 pm @ 25 It appears that the US Dept. of Commerce only considers IP theft to be legitimate if a US corporation does the stealing.

  27. Joachim Martillo March 26, 2018 12:56 pm

    As I analyze internal USPTO email, I see evidence of internal modeling and discussion of the economic effects of a claim. Such info, which the USPTO is not mandated to collect or to generate, can easily be used in corruptly negotiating a price for claim invalidation with an outside organization.

    This system only works successfully if the corruption is confined to a few USPTO officials and to a few APJs. (The examiners just do what senior USPTO officials and database flags tell them to do.)

    I have wondered how the necessary corruption related info gets to APJs especially in post-grant proceedings when flagging may not be sufficient. Phantom expanded panels seems to be a great way for corrupt senior USPTO officials to direct a coterie of corrupt APJs, who can then guide the rest of the APJs, who don’t have a clue about the misuse of post-grant review proceedings.

    The current corrupt officials have had decades to perfect their practices.

    The systematic corruption in post-grant review proceedings is so much cleaner and more streamlined than corruption at the examination level.

    Just take a look at this petition from John Harvey.

    For the sake of SAWS, the USPTO seems to have been engaging in some secret substantive rule-making in violation of the APA. Because SAWS resulted in defrauding the USA of tax revenue, it was a violation of 18 U.S. Code § 371 – Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States. Because I find increasing evidence that SAWS continues to exist under another name, I should probably have written “it is a violation of 18 U.S. Code § 371…” and probably continues to perform an important role in the theft of IP inventors when the IP is in early stages of development.

    Post-grant review proceedings is still superior to examination level corruption because a “bait-and-switch” if the “baiting” is done honestly by an honest examiner.

    Note the described role of Andrew Faile in the Harvey document. He seems to have acted to clean up the mess made by Examiner Luther. Faile today is Deputy Commissioner for Patent Operations, a senior role that enables a lot of control behind the scenes.

    I don’t believe all the intentions behind the emasculation of the patent system were evil. Honest USPTO officials possibly saw that Olof Söderblom and Gilbert Hyatt gamed or conned the US patent system. Such officials probably sought a way to make such shenanigans difficult. Less honest officials probably said to themselves, If those two guys can rack in the money, why can’t we?”

    At this point, Article III courts can help fix the patent system, but there is a big need to open up an FBI office right in the USPTO so that special agents, who are patent agents and patent lawyers, can grovel through all the records to determine who need to be interrogated.

  28. Night Writer March 26, 2018 3:24 pm

    @27 This is a very good point.

  29. AAA JJ March 26, 2018 8:31 pm

    That petition is Exhibit A of why you don’t attempt to “work with” the examiner(s) or any of the lifer management. Respond to what they send you in writing, and that’s it. If they send you bs rejections, traverse them. If they don’t withdraw them, appeal. Plain and simple.

  30. Don Quixote March 26, 2018 11:41 pm

    Joachim Martillo – thanks for the great post.

    “This system only works successfully if the corruption is confined to a few USPTO officials and to a few APJs. (The examiners just do what senior USPTO officials and database flags tell them to do.)”

    Absolutely agree – and actively cultivating dramatically different cultures in different Group Art Units is one effective way to silo the desired effects (see the completely disparate allowance rates of very much overlapping GAU’s).

    In this way, the non-statute policies of 903.08 can completely determine the fate of a PCT filing (and all continuations with very different art) to an either “easy street” examination, or, conversely, complete non-responsive obstruction, within either of two separate overlapping GAU’s. This is a perfect mechanism for insider corruption by a select few pulling the strings.

  31. Tim March 28, 2018 7:51 am

    Night Rider and others, I continue to see Google pop up from time to time and just again saw the infamous Judge Meyer mentioned. As many of us were knocked into the dirt after a 12-0 jury decision on every count against Google, AOL, Gannett and target (Judge Jackson’s Norfolk Court) case: Vringo vs IP Internet, was overturned by Judges Meyer & Wallach, while the only qualified Judge Chen “highly dissented”. And later, after Enbanc failed, Attorney David Buies took the case to the US Supreme Court, only to have the court fail to look at the case. Obama not only corrupted the DOJ/FBI, but also our court system! Vringo was decimated to pennies, and tried to re-invent itself to FH, and now XPSA and is at about $.80 a share. We shareholders lost life savings, while the dark knight “Google” and others showed that juries can be fixed and findings tossed, and our US Supreme Court will show a blind eye.

  32. Don Quixote March 29, 2018 4:02 pm

    Blaming Trump, Obama, or Bush isn’t going to help anything – these figureheads are simply doing what they are told to do by their “advisors.”

    The patent laws are being systemically corrupted, in broad daylight, by the usual suspects, to explicitly remove transparency, accountability, and objectivity from the patent legal process. This is a logical, non-partisan, apolitical observation, where my only evident bias is toward maintaining “the rule of law”.

    Remarkably, there are now establishment think-tanks and shills, such as Posner, who feign expertise in patent law (and anything else), and proceed to gaslight the public into believing that they should disregard even “the rule of law” as a quaint anachronism. Probably this is not coincidence.

    No one has to prove a conspiracy to observe the obviously compromised nature of these new laws, or to particularly point it out on its merits, or to object to it under the principles of our US Constitution. I believe that is the most effective use of energy.

  33. John L Guymon April 1, 2018 12:13 am

    To Don Quixote – view
    http://www.Intelledoc.Com/Pet12a.pdf and give me contact info and I will show more.

  34. John L Guymon April 2, 2018 12:31 am

    Want to see more of those phantom decisions (more than perhaps 60,000 since 2014). I have lists of OPPT decisions that are Granted, Dismissed and Denied. All have phony date stamps. I also have lists of valid decisions (same time period) that have good date stamps. See

    http://www.Intelledoc.Com/Pet12a.pdf for a small sample of this and that and of some PDF’s that have funny graphic artwork’ups!

  35. John L Guymon April 2, 2018 12:33 am

    REGARDING SAWS Favorable Applications…
    (Copy the text below and apply a standard spaced font to view)

    Below is a portion of the output from
    a program used to generate the missing event count
    and monitor certain event codes.

    If an application has any of these then the
    Application info line is outputed.

    *The ‘D’ was the sort at the time and
    means DVER – Document Verification
    which is an event that the USPTO
    removed in the 2016 data.

    This is using the 2015 data due to the
    ‘D’ event that was being watched.

    These are some of the more prominant ones
    that may be included in a FAVORABLE
    SAWS program included application. Remember
    SAWS helped and hurt applications.

    FAVORABLE SAWS Applications might have:

    “E”,”2014″,”EML_”,”EML_NTR”, // 0Email Notification
    “O”,”2014″,”OIPE”,”OIPE”, // 1Application Dispatched from OIPE
    “Z”,”2014″,”EMLZ”,”EML_NTF”, // 2Email Notification
    “_”,”2014″,”ELC_”,”ELC_RVW”, // 3Electronic Review
    “A”,”2014″,”COMP”,”COMP”, // 4Application Is Now Complete
    “M”,”2014″,”MN/=”,”MN/=.”, // 5Mail Notice of Allowance
    “N”,”2014″,”N/=.”,”N/=.”, // 6Notice of Allowance Data Verification Completed
    “P”,”2014″,”PILS”,”PILS”, // 7Application Is Considered Ready for Issue
    “R”,”2014″,”RCAP”,”RCAP”, // 8Reference capture on IDS
    “C”,”2014″,”C.AD”,”C.AD”, // 9Correspondence Address Change
    “D”,”2014″,”DVER”,”DVER”, //10Document Verification
    “2”,”2014″,”R102″,”R1021″, //11Receipt into Pubs
    “.”,”2014″,”A.NE”,”A.NE”, //12Response after Final Action
    “X”,”2014″,”EX.A”,”EX.A”, //13Examiner’s Amendment Communication
    “S”,”2014″,”CTRS”,”CTRS”, //14Restriction/Election Requirement
    “G”,”2014″,”APPE”,”APPERMS”, //15Applicants have given acceptable permission for par
    “F”,”2014″,”EX.R”,”EX.R”, //16Reasons for Allowance
    “c”,”2014″,”C.AZ”,”C.ADB”, //17Correspondence Address Change
    “d”,”2014″,”D122″,”D1220″, //18Dispatch to Publications
    “l”,”2014″,”L197″,”L197″, //19Receipt of Acknowledgment Letter

    App – Application
    EvCodes – EOZ_AMNPRCD2.XSGFcdl
    ALL – This is if all entries were supplied
    Act – This is actual entries
    Mis – Missing Events Count from USPTO Data

    App EOZ_AMNPRCD2.XSGFcdl ALL Act Mis
    11606458, O AMNPR D2.XS F l,139,105,34
    11621703,EOZ_AMNP D2.XS F ,143,117,26
    11606700, O AMNP CD2.XS F ,122, 92,30
    11602037, O AMNP CD2.XS F , 93, 78,15
    11638254, OZ_AMNPRCD2.XS F , 73, 55,18
    11589162, O AMNPR D2.XS c , 67, 55,12
    11640517,EOZ_AMNPRCD2.XS ,105, 85,20
    11625189,EOZ_ MNP D2.XS ,104, 81,23
    11633070, OZ_ MNPRCD2.XS ,101, 83,18
    11639794,EOZ_AMNPR D2.XS , 96, 75,21
    11603688, O AMN D2.XS , 95, 66,29
    11636599, O AMNPRCD2.XS , 93, 77,16
    11596845, O MNPR D2.XS , 93, 71,22
    11607732,EOZ_AMNPR D2.XS , 92, 76,16
    11607714, O AMNPR D2.XS , 90, 76,14
    11595983, O AMNPRCD2.XS , 89, 77,12
    11590717,EOZ_AMNPR D2.XS , 88, 75,13
    11611889, O AMNPRCD2.XS , 88, 71,17
    11633653,EOZ_AMNPR D2.XS , 84, 70,14
    11607792,EOZ_AMNPR D2.XS , 82, 73, 9
    11607723,EOZ_AMNPR D2.XS , 81, 67,14
    11608646,EOZ_AMNP D2.XS , 78, 67,11
    11607672,EOZ_AMNP D2.XS , 75, 61,14
    11591847, O AMNP D2.XS , 73, 53,20
    11594343, O AMNPRCD2.XS , 72, 61,11
    11599162, O AMNPR D2.XS , 69, 55,14
    11637340, O AMNPR D2.XS , 62, 55, 7
    11638420,EOZ_AMNP D2.XS , 59, 49,10
    11604407, O AMNP D2.X Fc , 65, 47,18
    11599390, O AMNPR D2.X F ,185,154,31
    11636970, O AMNPR D2.X F ,142,110,32
    11638830, O AMNP CD2.X c , 73, 57,16
    11599628, O AMNPR D2.X c , 64, 48,16
    11595343,EOZ_AMNP CD2.X l, 96, 85,11
    11588873, O AMNPRCD2.X l, 95, 81,14
    11604400,EOZ_ MNP CD2.X ,109, 92,17
    11590897,EOZ_AMNPRCD2.X ,108, 95,13
    11591725,EO AMNP CD2.X , 95, 78,17
    11594221, O AMNP D2.X , 80, 63,17
    11637635,EOZ_AMNP D2.X , 78, 54,24
    11594828, O AMNPR D2.X , 75, 60,15
    11592268, O AMNPRCD2.X , 71, 55,16
    11591798, O AMNPR D2.X , 66, 54,12
    11595640, O AMNP D2.X , 61, 49,12
    11609618, O AMNPRCD2.X , 57, 43,14
    11593182, O AMNPRCD2.X , 55, 42,13
    11633747, O AMNPRCD2.X , 55, 42,13
    11601353, O AMNPR D2.X , 54, 46, 8
    11594379,EOZ_AMNPR D2. S Fc l,114, 97,17

  36. Joachim Martillo April 3, 2018 3:31 pm

    Can you identify any applications, which were actually helped to issuance by SAWS flagging? I only see total rejections of SAWS applications — which isn’t surprising because the FOIA documents indicate that no SAWS application was to issue until it was released from SAWS. Because applicants were not informed of SAWS status, it was difficult if not impossible for an applicant to get his application released from SAWS. APJs on the BPAI or PTAB were informed of SAWS status and were ordered to uphold the examiner’s rejections.

  37. John L Guymon April 3, 2018 5:12 pm

    All of those in that list I believe were helped – for sure they were not hindered and if you see the missing event count you will see some have 30+ events missing (not in public data) – the USPTO hides these events – in this case 30+ = the activity devoted to doing something secret – in the PTA tab of PAIR a person can see these events whereas in the TRANS tab and IFW tab these codes are not shown. In the data these codes are not there but the PTA tab shows what they are.

  38. John L Guymon April 3, 2018 6:14 pm

    These codes appear more in SAWS related files…
    “E”//_0Email_Notification
    “O”//_1Application_Dispatched_from_OIPE
    “Z”//_2Email_Notification
    “~”//_3Electronic_Review
    “A”//_4Application_Is_Now_Complete
    “M”//_5Mail_Notice_of_Allowance
    “N”//_6Notice_of_Allowance_Data_Verification_Completed
    “P”//_7Application_Is_Considered_Ready_for_Issue
    “R”//_8Reference_capture_on_IDS
    “C”//_9Correspondence_Address_Change
    “D”//10Document_Verification
    “2”//11Receipt_into_Pubs **Finding the DATES for this**
    “*”//12Response_after_Final_Action
    “X”//13Examiner’s_Amendment_Communication
    “S”//14Restriction/Election_Requirement
    “G”//15Applicants_have_given_acceptable_permission_for_par
    “F”//16Reasons_for_Allowance
    “c”//17Correspondence_Address_Change
    “d”//18Dispatch_to_Publications
    “l”//19Receipt_of_Acknowledgment_Letter

    ****Very interesting segment – mostly 2’s
    and without the D – these look like SAWS
    files – see 10/054,568

    10054547,_O__A____C__________,_23,_22,_1
    10054548,_O__A____C__________,_24,_24,_0
    10054549,_O__A____C__________,_25,_25,_0
    10054550,_O__AMNP_C_2________,_41,_38,_3
    10054551,_O__AMNPR___________,_47,_41,_6
    10054552,_O__AMNP___2_X______,_49,_43,_6
    10054553,_O__AMNP_C_2__S___d_,_39,_37,_2
    10054554,_O__AMNPRC_2________,_32,_29,_3
    10054555,_O__AMNP___2*_S_____,_44,_40,_4
    10054556,_O__AMNP___2*X______,_41,_40,_1
    10054557,_O__AMNP___2_____c__,_38,_30,_8
    10054558,_O__A_______*_______,_56,_51,_5
    10054559,_O__A_______________,_16,_16,_0
    10054560,_O__AMNP_C_2______d_,_41,_38,_3
    10054561,_O__AMNP___2________,_23,_22,_1
    10054562,_O__AMNP___2*_S_____,_55,_49,_6
    10054563,_O__AMNP___2_X______,_34,_29,_5
    10054564,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_31,_30,_1
    10054565,_O__A_________S_____,_17,_17,_0
    10054566,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_39,_37,_2
    10054567,_O__A___R___________,_44,_44,_0
    10054568,_O__AMNPR__2_X___c__,_62,_53,_9
    10054569,_O__AMNP___2*_____d_,_45,_42,_3
    10054570,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_37,_34,_3
    10054571,_O__AMNP___2________,_46,_42,_4
    10054572,_O__A_______________,_10,_10,_0
    10054573,_O__AMNP___2________,_23,_22,_1
    10054574,_O__A___R___*____c__,_31,_31,_0
    10054575,_O__AMNPRC_2_X___c__,_61,_56,_5
    10054576,_O__AMNP___2__S___d_,_32,_31,_1
    10054577,EO__AMNPRC___XS_____,_65,_57,_8
    10054578,_O__AMNP_C_2_____cd_,_41,_40,_1
    10054579,_O__AMNP_C_2__S__c__,_49,_46,_3
    10054580,_O__A_______________,_22,_20,_2
    10054581,_O__A_______*_______,_23,_22,_1
    10054582,_O__A_______________,_17,_17,_0
    10054584,_O__AMNP___2__S_____,_43,_39,_4
    10054585,_O__A_______*____c__,_30,_28,_2
    10054586,_O__AMNP___2__S___d_,_36,_35,_1
    10054587,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_29,_26,_3
    10054588,_O__AMNP_C_2______d_,_31,_28,_3
    10054590,_O__AMN____2______d_,_22,_20,_2
    10054591,_O__AMNP_C_2_____cd_,_36,_33,_3
    10054592,_O__A_______________,_20,_20,_0
    10054593,_O__A_______________,_18,_16,_2
    10054594,_O__AMNP___2*_____d_,_34,_32,_2
    10054595,_O__AMNPRC__*X___c__,_70,_59,11
    10054596,_O__AMNP___2*X____d_,_47,_46,_1
    10054597,_O__AMNPRCD__X______,_74,_66,_8
    10054598,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_31,_29,_2
    10054599,_O__AMNP___2*X___c__,_46,_43,_3
    10054600,EO__AMNP_C_2__S_____,_38,_34,_4
    10054601,_O__AMNP___2________,_36,_34,_2
    10054603,_O__AMNPR___*_______,_55,_47,_8
    10054604,EOZ~AMNP__D_________,_96,_87,_9
    10054605,_O__A_______*_______,_44,_43,_1
    10054606,_O__AMNP___2________,_43,_41,_2
    10054607,_O__AMNP____*_______,_52,_45,_7
    10054609,_O__AMN____2______d_,_21,_18,_3
    10054610,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_44,_38,_6
    10054611,_O__AMNPR____X______,_67,_62,_5
    10054612,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_29,_28,_1
    10054613,_O__AMNP___2_____cd_,_35,_33,_2
    10054614,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_28,_26,_2
    10054615,_O__AMNP___2__S___d_,_37,_35,_2
    10054616,_O__AMNPRC_2_XS_____,_73,_64,_9
    10054617,_O__AMNP_C_2*_______,_39,_37,_2
    10054618,_O__AMNPR__2________,_42,_38,_4
    10054619,_O__AMNPRC_2_X____d_,_80,_76,_4
    10054620,_O__A___R___*_______,_42,_41,_1
    10054621,_O__AMNPRC_2__S_____,_44,_41,_3
    10054622,_O__A_______*_______,_26,_26,_0
    10054623,EOZ~AMNP_CD_*X___c__,_94,_88,_6
    10054624,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_50,_47,_3
    10054626,_O__AMNP___2__S___d_,_29,_27,_2
    10054627,_O__AMNP_C_2_____cd_,_41,_38,_3
    10054628,_O__A___R___*_______,_86,_82,_4
    10054629,_O__AMNP_C_2__S_____,_45,_42,_3
    10054630,_O__A_________S__c__,_23,_23,_0
    10054631,E___AMNPRC___X______,_73,_62,11
    10054632,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_31,_29,_2
    10054633,_O__AMNP____*_S_____,_86,_75,11
    10054634,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_38,_36,_2
    10054636,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_34,_32,_2
    10054637,_O__A_______________,_17,_17,_0
    10054638,EOZ~AMNPRCD__XS_____,228,185,43
    10054639,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_31,_29,_2
    10054640,_O__AMN____2______d_,_21,_20,_1
    10054641,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_35,_31,_4
    10054642,_O__AMNP_C_2_____cd_,_28,_26,_2
    10054643,_O__AMNPR__2*X______,_54,_49,_5
    10054644,_O__AMNP___2__S__cd_,_42,_39,_3
    10054645,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_25,_23,_2
    10054646,_O__AMNP___2_____cd_,_34,_33,_1
    10054647,_O__A_______*_______,_74,_69,_5
    10054648,_O__AMNP___2_____cd_,_35,_32,_3
    10054649,_O__AMNP_C_2______d_,_43,_41,_2
    10054650,_O__AMNP_C__*_______,_84,_75,_9
    10054651,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_39,_37,_2
    10054652,_O__AMNPR_D______c__,_60,_52,_8
    10054653,_O__AMNPRC__*XS__c__,_78,_67,11
    10054654,_O__AMNP___2*_____d_,_46,_44,_2
    10054655,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_33,_30,_3
    10054656,_O__AMNP___2__S___d_,_36,_34,_2
    10054657,_O__AMNP_C_2________,_35,_32,_3
    10054658,_O__A_______________,_14,_14,_0
    10054659,_O__AMNP___2_XS_____,_45,_40,_5
    10054660,_O__AMNP_C_2______d_,_40,_36,_4
    10054661,_O__AMNP_C_2________,_36,_33,_3
    10054662,_O__AMNP___2_XS___d_,_54,_47,_7
    10054663,_O__AMNP___2_____cd_,_31,_30,_1
    10054664,_O__AMNP___2__S___d_,_39,_36,_3
    10054665,_O__AMNPR__2__S_____,_54,_47,_7
    10054666,_O__AMNP_C_2_XS__c__,_52,_49,_3
    10054667,_O__AMNP___2_____c__,_36,_33,_3
    10054668,_O__AMNP____________,_32,_26,_6
    10054669,_O__AMNP_C_2______d_,_51,_50,_1
    10054670,_O__AMNP_C__*_______,_68,_60,_8
    10054671,_O__AMNPRCD__X______,_94,_73,21
    10054672,_O__AMNP_C_2________,_44,_39,_5
    10054674,_O__A_______________,_12,_12,_0
    10054675,_O__AMNP___2______d_,_40,_38,_2
    10054676,_O__AMNP_C_2_XS_____,_54,_48,_6

  39. John L Guymon April 3, 2018 6:16 pm

    These codes appear more in SAWS related files…
    “E”//_0Email_Notification
    “O”//_1Application_Dispatched_from_OIPE
    “Z”//_2Email_Notification
    “~”//_3Electronic_Review
    “A”//_4Application_Is_Now_Complete
    “M”//_5Mail_Notice_of_Allowance
    “N”//_6Notice_of_Allowance_Data_Verification_Completed
    “P”//_7Application_Is_Considered_Ready_for_Issue
    “R”//_8Reference_capture_on_IDS
    “C”//_9Correspondence_Address_Change
    “D”//10Document_Verification
    “2”//11Receipt_into_Pubs **Finding the DATES for this**
    “*”//12Response_after_Final_Action
    “X”//13Examiner’s_Amendment_Communication
    “S”//14Restriction/Election_Requirement
    “G”//15Applicants_have_given_acceptable_permission_for_par
    “F”//16Reasons_for_Allowance
    “c”//17Correspondence_Address_Change
    “d”//18Dispatch_to_Publications
    “l”//19Receipt_of_Acknowledgment_Letter

    ****I_wonder_if_’D2’_ones_are_the_ones****

    This_segment_are_specific_D2_applications_
    The_2_means_R1021_code_(Receipt_into_Pubs)
    There are applications ‘in between’ these ones!

    11592430,EO__AMNP_CD2_____c__,_51,_42,_9
    11592441,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_37,_30,_7
    11592451,EOZ~AMNPRCD2*_S_____,_93,_74,19
    11592521,EOZ~AMNPR_D2________,_49,_39,10
    11592583,_O__AMNPR_D2________,_37,_29,_8
    11592654,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_31,_28,_3
    11592759,_O__AMNPR_D2_X___c__,_80,_69,11
    11592858,_O__AMNPR_D2_X___c__,_56,_45,11
    11592869,_O__AMNPR_D2________,_43,_34,_9
    11592901,_O__AMNPRCD2_X__Fcd_,126,_97,29
    11592903,_O__AMNPR_D2_X___c__,_56,_44,12
    11593038,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_47,_38,_9
    11593099,EOZ~AMNPRCD2_XS_____,_96,_85,11
    11593100,_O__AMNPR_D2_XS_____,_65,_54,11
    11593123,_O__AMNP_CD2_____c__,_65,_43,22
    11593125,EO__AMNPRCD2________,_35,_30,_5
    11593126,_O__AMNP__D2________,_33,_25,_8
    11593182,_O__AMNPRCD2*X______,_55,_42,13
    11593192,_O__AMNP__D2*_______,_34,_31,_3
    11593258,_OZ~AMNPRCD2_X______,225,194,31
    11593263,_O__AMNP__D2________,_39,_31,_8
    11593279,EOZ~_MNPR_D2_XS_____,_60,_49,11
    11593280,EOZ~AMNPR_D2*_______,131,111,20
    11593302,_O__A__P__D2________,_38,_29,_9
    11593411,_O__AMNPRCD2________,_77,_60,17
    11593612,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_36,_27,_9
    11593627,_O__AMNP__D2*_______,_69,_60,_9
    11593747,_O__AMNPR_D2_XS____l,_67,_58,_9
    11593796,_O__AMNPR_D2_____c__,_46,_38,_8
    11593831,_O__AMNPR_D2________,_46,_36,10
    11593882,_O__AMNP__D2________,_34,_27,_7
    11593966,EOZ~AMNPRCD2_X______,_97,_82,15
    11593975,_O__AMN_RCD2*_S_____,105,_86,19
    11594045,_O__AMNP__D2________,_32,_27,_5
    11594135,EOZ~AMNP__D2*_______,_68,_56,12
    11594221,_O__AMNP__D2*X______,_80,_63,17
    11594248,_O__AMNP_CD2_X______,_56,_43,13
    11594259,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_33,_30,_3
    11594343,_O__AMNPRCD2*XS_____,_72,_61,11
    11594379,EOZ~AMNPR_D2*_S_Fc_l,114,_97,17
    11594391,_O__AMNP__D2________,_32,_29,_3
    11594392,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_32,_29,_3
    11594393,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_36,_33,_3
    11594396,EOZ~AMNPR_D2_XSG_c__,_87,_75,12
    11594425,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_34,_28,_6
    11594455,EOZ~AMNPR_D2________,110,_88,22
    11594505,_O__AMNPR_D2________,_59,_45,14
    11594528,_O__AMNP__D2________,_55,_43,12
    11594530,_O__AMNP__D2__S_____,_54,_44,10
    11594611,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_42,_36,_6
    11594614,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_37,_34,_3
    11594622,_O__AMNP__D2_X___c__,_48,_41,_7
    11594628,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_35,_32,_3
    11594629,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_31,_28,_3
    11594664,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_31,_28,_3
    11594665,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_29,_26,_3
    11594721,EOZ~AMNP__D2_X______,_54,_43,11
    11594722,_O__AMNP_CD2_____c__,_42,_28,14
    11594756,_O__AMNPR_D2*_______,_45,_35,10
    11594828,_O__AMNPR_D2*X______,_75,_60,15
    11595001,EOZ~AMNPRCD2________,_79,_64,15
    11595005,_O__AMNPRCD2________,_71,_58,13
    11595035,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_34,_29,_5
    11595105,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_46,_36,10
    11595112,_O__AMNP__D2__S_____,_51,_43,_8
    11595168,EOZ~AMNP_CD2_X___c__,_63,_49,14
    11595200,EOZ~AMNPR_D2*_______,_61,_49,12
    11595221,EOZ~AMNPRCD2_XS_F___,_92,_77,15
    11595245,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_68,_50,18
    11595275,EOZ~AMNPRCD2_X______,_68,_50,18
    11595317,EOZ~AMNPRCD2*___F___,106,_83,23
    11595343,EOZ~AMNP_CD2*X_____l,_96,_85,11
    11595369,_O__AMN_RCD2_X__F___,_72,_57,15
    11595432,_O__AMNP__D2________,_33,_27,_6
    11595433,_O__AMNP__D2________,_34,_27,_7
    11595627,_O__AMNPR_D2_XS__c__,_62,_51,11
    11595640,_O__AMNP__D2*X______,_61,_49,12
    11595698,_O__AMNP__D2__S_____,_63,_53,10
    11595713,_O__AMNPRCD2_____c__,_45,_36,_9
    11595818,EO__AMNP__D2__S____l,_55,_46,_9
    11595828,EO__AMNPR_D2*_______,_72,_58,14
    11595907,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_62,_49,13
    11595983,_O__AMNPRCD2*XS_____,_89,_77,12
    11596041,_O___MNPR_D2_XS_____,_71,_57,14
    11596336,_O___MNPR_D2________,_60,_45,15
    11596470,_O___MNPR_D2_____c__,_65,_40,25
    11596494,EOZ~_MNPRCD2_XS_F___,_96,_73,23
    11596502,_O___MNPR_D2_X__F___,_98,_71,27
    11596557,_O___MNP__D2_XS_____,_62,_48,14
    11596703,_O___MNP_CD2*_S_____,_77,_64,13
    11596845,_O___MNPR_D2*XS_____,_93,_71,22
    11596922,EO___MNPRCD2*____c__,_61,_52,_9
    11597661,_O___MNPRCD2_XS_____,_80,_64,16
    11598148,_O__AMNP__D2_XS_____,_71,_51,20
    11598153,_O__AMNPR_D2*_______,_49,_44,_5
    11598156,_O__AMNPRCD2_X______,_60,_54,_6
    11598179,_O__AMNP__D2_XS_____,_59,_48,11
    11598212,_O__AMNPR_D2_XS_____,_70,_57,13
    11598256,_O__AMNP__D2__S_____,_62,_50,12
    11598259,EOZ~AMNPRCD2*_______,108,_93,15
    11598278,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_30,_27,_3
    11598309,_O__AMNPRCD2________,_65,_48,17
    11598354,EOZ~AMNP__D2__S__c__,_60,_48,12
    11598382,_O__AMNPRCD2__S_____,_45,_37,_8
    11598384,_O__AMNP_CD2_XS__c__,_77,_63,14
    11598457,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_41,_33,_8
    11598495,_O__AMNPR_D2*_______,_74,_61,13
    11598524,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_52,_42,10
    11598532,_O__AMNP__D2________,_71,_46,25
    11598608,_O__AMNP__D2________,_58,_42,16
    11598778,EOZ~AMNP__D2_X______,_31,_28,_3
    11598916,_O___MNPR_D2_XSGF___,120,_91,29
    11598943,_O__AMNP_CD2________,_51,_38,13
    11599021,_O__AMNP__D2________,_35,_27,_8
    11599122,EO__AMNPR_D2_X______,_61,_46,15
    11599162,_O__AMNPR_D2*XS_____,_69,_55,14
    11599198,_O__AMNP__D2_X______,_31,_26,_5
    11599205,_O__AMNP_CD2________,_53,_39,14
    11599344,_O__AMNPR_D2____F___,176,144,32
    11599373,_O__AMNPR_D2__S_____,_65,_44,21
    11599390,_O__AMNPR_D2*X__F___,185,154,31
    11599571,_O__AMNPR_D2_XS_____,_55,_48,_7
    11599628,_O__AMNPR_D2*X___c__,_64,_48,16
    11599634,_O__AMNP__D2_____c__,_44,_30,14
    11599678,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_41,_36,_5
    11599791,_O__AMNPRCD2*______l,_63,_47,16
    11599834,_O__AMNPRCD2_______l,_57,_48,_9
    11599947,_O__AMNPR_D2*_______,_55,_44,11
    11599970,_O__AMNPR_D2_X______,_39,_33,_6
    11600007,EOZ~AMNPRCD2__S_____,_69,_51,18
    11600009,_O__AMNPR_D2*_S_____,_71,_58,13
    11600253,_O__AMNPR_D2________,_44,_32,12
    11600298,_O___MNPR_D2________,_58,_41,17
    11600308,EOZ~AMN_R_D2*_______,_59,_42,17
    11600309,_O__AMNP__D2________,_77,_42,35
    11600340,_O__AMNPR_D2*______l,_88,_51,37
    11600599,_O__AMNPR_D2____Fc__,_85,_69,16
    11600688,EO__AMNPRCD2________,_41,_37,_4
    11600689,EO__AMNPRCD2*_______,109,_66,43
    11600893,_O__AMNPR_D2__S_F___,_69,_55,14
    11600913,EO__AMNPRCD2________,_75,_59,16
    11600953,EOZ~AMNPR_D2_XS_____,_61,_53,_8
    11600966,_O__AMNPR_D2*_______,_70,_53,17
    11601041,_O___MNPR_D2_XS_____,_58,_51,_7
    11601059,_O__AMNP_CD2_XS__c__,_92,_84,_8
    11601141,_O__AMNP__D2_X___c__,_45,_38,_7

  40. John L Guymon April 3, 2018 6:17 pm

    Notice the ‘D’ – this code hidden in 2016 data
    and is for Document Verification – I am not sure
    if this is done for ALL issued patents but I
    know being hidden and showing up in SAWS type
    of cases speaks something…

    12063717,_O___MNPR_D_____F___,_42,_33,_9Saws?
    12063718,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_42,_34,_8Saws?
    12063719,EOZ~_MNPRCD__XS_____,_69,_59,10Saws?
    12063720,_O___MNP__D__X______,_44,_33,11Saws?
    12063721,EOZ~_MNPR_D___S_F___,115,_96,19Saws?
    12063722,EO___MN_R_D_________,_31,_25,_6Saws?
    12063723,_O___MNPRCD_____Fc__,_63,_46,17Saws?
    12063724,EO__________________,_23,_20,_3
    12063725,EOZ~________*_______,132,102,30
    12063726,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_54,_44,10Saws?
    12063727,_O__________________,_30,_28,_2
    12063728,EO__________________,_22,_20,_2
    12063729,_O___MN___D_________,_26,_19,_7Saws?
    12063731,_O___MNPR_D______c__,_51,_40,11Saws?
    12063732,_O__________*_______,_47,_42,_5
    12063733,EOZ~_MNPRCD__X______,133,105,28Saws?
    12063734,_O___MNPR_D_________,_42,_33,_9Saws?
    12063735,EOZ~_MNP__D_____F___,_69,_53,16Saws?
    12063736,_O___MNPR_D_________,_53,_43,10Saws?
    12063737,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____F___,_91,_71,20Saws?
    12063738,_O___MNPR_D__X______,_51,_40,11Saws?
    12063739,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*___F___,103,_86,17Saws?
    12063740,_O____________S_____,_17,_17,_0
    12063741,_O___MNPR_D__X__F___,_82,_55,27
    12063742,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_47,_38,_9
    12063743,EOZ~_MNPRCD_*___F___,_77,_63,14
    12063744,EOZ~____R_____S_____,_57,_51,_6
    12063745,EO___MNP__D_________,_52,_42,10
    12063746,EOZ~__________S_____,_36,_34,_2
    12063747,EOZ~_MNP__D__X__Fc__,_79,_60,19
    12063748,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_50,_36,14
    12063749,EOZ~_MNP__D__XS_____,_54,_41,13
    12063750,EOZ~_MN_R_D_________,_61,_50,11
    12063751,EOZ~_MNP__D_*_______,101,_78,23
    12063752,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____F___,_64,_49,15
    12063753,EOZ~____RC____S_____,_55,_51,_4
    12063754,_O___MNPR_D_____F___,_47,_36,11
    12063755,EOZ~____R___________,_26,_25,_1
    12063756,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_44,_36,_8
    12063757,EOZ~____R_____S_____,_63,_52,11
    12063758,_O______R___________,_31,_30,_1
    12063759,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_47,_36,11
    12063760,_O______R___________,_66,_58,_8
    12063761,EOZ~_MNP__D__XS_Fc__,135,108,27
    12063762,_O__________________,_25,_24,_1
    12063763,EOZ~_MNP_CD___S_____,_72,_61,11
    12063764,_O__________________,_22,_18,_4
    12063765,EO______RC____S__c__,_36,_36,_0
    12063766,EOZ~_MN_R_D__XS_____,_74,_62,12
    12063767,EOZ~____R___*_______,105,_85,20
    12063768,_O______R_____S_____,_51,_38,13
    12063769,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*_______,_94,_77,17
    12063770,EOZ~________________,_47,_41,_6
    12063773,EOZ~________________,_35,_30,_5
    12063774,EOZ~_MNPR_D___S_____,_54,_45,_9
    12063775,EOZ~__________S_____,_22,_21,_1
    12063776,EO______R___________,_31,_25,_6
    12063777,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____F___,_62,_46,16
    12063778,_O______R___*_______,_68,_46,22
    12063779,_O______R___________,_39,_34,_5
    12063780,_O___MNP_CD_*___F___,_62,_43,19
    12063781,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*_S_____,107,_94,13
    12063782,EOZ~________________,_32,_30,_2
    12063783,_O____________S_____,_33,_31,_2
    12063784,_O______R___________,_31,_24,_7
    12063785,_O______R___________,_29,_24,_5
    12063786,_O___MNPR_D_____F___,_47,_33,14
    12063787,_O___MNP__D_________,_42,_34,_8
    12063788,_O___MNP__D_*_______,_53,_42,11
    12063789,_O___MNPR_D_*_______,_66,_56,10
    12063790,_O______R___________,_40,_34,_6
    12063791,EO______R___________,_30,_25,_5
    12063792,_O______R_____S_____,_28,_26,_2
    12063793,_O____________S_____,_20,_19,_1
    12063794,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*X______,_81,_68,13
    12063795,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_94,_67,27
    12063796,_O___MNPR_D_________,_93,_53,40
    12063797,EOZ~________________,_28,_24,_4
    12063798,_O___MNP__D___S_____,_46,_36,10
    12063799,EOZ~_MNP__D_____F___,_64,_48,16
    12063800,_O______R___________,_22,_20,_2
    12063802,EOZ~_MNP_CD__XS_____,_60,_49,11
    12063803,EOZ~____RC____S_____,_28,_25,_3
    12063804,EOZ~__________S_____,_26,_26,_0
    12063805,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*X__F___,106,_83,23
    12063806,EOZ~____R___________,_35,_29,_6
    12063807,_O___MNPRCD_*X______,_57,_41,16
    12063808,_O___MNPR_D_*____c__,_88,_72,16
    12063809,EO__________________,_30,_25,_5
    12063810,EOZ~____R_____S_____,100,_84,16
    12063811,EO___MNP_CD_*_______,_79,_47,32
    12063812,EO______R___________,_45,_36,_9
    12063813,_O___MNP__D__X__F___,_81,_57,24
    12063814,EOZ~____R_____S_____,105,_86,19
    12063815,EOZ~____RC__________,_74,_65,_9
    12063816,EOZ~_____C__________,_29,_26,_3
    12063817,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,102,_82,20
    12063818,EOZ~_MNP__D__XS_____,_63,_51,12
    12063819,_O___MNPR_D___S_____,122,_94,28
    12063820,_O___MNPR_D_________,_42,_27,15
    12063821,EOZ~_MNP__D_*X__F___,_97,_71,26
    12063822,EOZ~_MNP__D_____F___,_54,_38,16
    12063823,EOZ~____R___*_S_____,152,120,32
    12063824,EOZ~____R_____S_____,_53,_45,_8
    12063825,EOZ~____R___________,_51,_42,_9
    12063826,EOZ~_MNP__D__XS_____,_83,_68,15
    12063827,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_61,_45,16
    12063828,EO___MNPR_D_*___F___,_70,_57,13
    12063829,EOZ~____RC__________,_33,_27,_6
    12063830,_O___MNPRCD___S_____,_60,_50,10
    12063831,_O______R_____S__c__,_62,_49,13
    12063832,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*X__F___,112,_92,20
    12063833,_O____________S_____,_31,_30,_1
    12063834,EO___MNPR_D_________,_55,_46,_9
    12063835,EOZ~_MNPR_D___S_F___,_67,_57,10
    12063836,EOZ~_MNPRCD__X______,111,_80,31
    12063837,EOZ~_MNPR_D__X__F___,_84,_71,13
    12063838,_O___MNP__D_________,_46,_36,10
    12063839,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*X__F___,117,_95,22
    12063840,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_50,_41,_9
    12063841,_O___MNPR_D_________,_38,_29,_9
    12063842,EOZ~____R_____S_____,_52,_49,_3
    12063843,_O___MNPR_D_________,_42,_34,_8
    12063844,EOZ~____R___________,_31,_30,_1
    12063845,_O____________S_____,_31,_24,_7
    12063846,EOZ~_MNP_____XS_____,_73,_55,18
    12063847,EOZ~____R___*_______,_87,_73,14
    12063848,_O__________________,_39,_25,14
    12063849,EOZ~_MNPR_D__XS_____,_68,_49,19
    12063850,_O___MNPR_D_________,_41,_34,_7
    12063851,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____Fc__,_78,_62,16
    12063852,EOZ~____R___________,_36,_34,_2
    12063853,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____F___,_84,_68,16
    12063854,EOZ~_MNP_CD_____F___,102,_69,33
    12063855,EO___MNP_CD_____F___,_88,_60,28
    12063856,EOZ~__________S_____,_34,_32,_2
    12063857,EOZ~_MNP__D_*___F___,175,134,41
    12063858,_O____________S_____,_18,_18,_0
    12063859,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_49,_39,10
    12063860,EO___MNP__D_____F___,_47,_34,13
    12063861,EOZ~____R___________,_26,_25,_1
    12063862,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*X__F___,113,_91,22
    12063863,_O__________________,_25,_21,_4
    12063864,EOZ~_MNP__D__XS_____,108,_80,28
    12063865,EOZ~_MNP__D_*___F___,100,_73,27
    12063866,EOZ~_MNPR_D__X______,_63,_49,14
    12063867,_O_______C__________,_23,_22,_1
    12063868,EOZ~____R___________,_35,_30,_5
    12063869,_O___MNP__D_*XS__c__,_68,_58,10
    12063870,_O___MNPR_D__X______,_51,_44,_7
    12063871,EOZ~_MNP__D_____F___,_52,_42,10
    12063872,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_53,_43,10
    12063873,EOZ~____R___*_______,_91,_75,16
    12063874,EOZ~____R___________,_29,_27,_2
    12063875,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____F___,_56,_40,16
    12063876,_OZ~____R___________,107,_84,23
    12063877,_O____________S_____,_24,_23,_1
    12063878,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_61,_45,16
    12063879,_O___MNP_CD_*___F___,_92,_72,20
    12063880,_O______R___________,_29,_25,_4
    12063881,_O___MNP__D_________,_51,_36,15
    12063882,EOZ~__________S_____,_58,_45,13
    12063883,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*_______,103,_84,19
    12063884,EOZ~_MNPR_D_____F___,_96,_52,44
    12063885,_O___MNPR_D__XS_F___,_54,_39,15
    12063886,EOZ~____R___*_______,108,_85,23
    12063887,EOZ~________________,_33,_26,_7
    12063888,EOZ~_MNPR_D__XS_F___,_86,_73,13
    12063889,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_45,_36,_9
    12063890,EOZ~_MNPR_D_*X__F___,_82,_65,17
    12063891,EOZ~_MNPR_D_________,_55,_42,13
    12063892,EOZ~_MNP__D_________,_49,_37,12
    12063893,EO___MN___D_________,_37,_31,_6

  41. John L Guymon April 3, 2018 6:18 pm

    ****This segment has more Grants per***

    13052653,EOZ~A_______*__G____,_70,_57,13
    13052654,_O__AMNPR_D____G____,_44,_32,12
    13052655,_O__A_________S_____,_52,_45,_7
    13052656,EOZ~AMNPR_D__X__F___,_44,_31,13
    13052657,EOZ~AMNPR_D_*X______,_64,_50,14
    13052658,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_36,_24,12
    13052659,EOZ~A_______________,_44,_38,_6
    13052660,_O__AMNPRCD_*___F___,_64,_50,14
    13052661,EOZ~A__________G____,_90,_70,20
    13052662,EOZ~AMNPRCD___S_F___,_62,_43,19
    13052663,EO__A_________S_____,_28,_23,_5
    13052664,EOZ~AMNP__D___SGF___,_96,_73,23
    13052665,EOZ~AMNPRCD__X__F___,_51,_37,14
    13052666,EOZ~A___R_____S_____,_53,_47,_6
    13052667,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____Fc__,347,256,91
    13052668,EOZ~AMNP__D____GF___,_68,_52,16
    13052669,EOZ~A___RC____S_____,_38,_36,_2
    13052670,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_53,_38,15
    13052671,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X__F___,128,_83,45
    13052672,EOZ~AMNP__D_*__GF___,_77,_60,17
    13052673,EOZ~A_______________,_82,_64,18
    13052674,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_57,_43,14
    13052675,_O__AMNP__D___S_F___,_50,_36,14
    13052676,_O__A__________G____,_59,_47,12
    13052677,_O__A_______________,_20,_15,_5
    13052678,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_82,_68,14
    13052679,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X__F___,_85,_69,16
    13052680,_O__AMNPR_D__X__F___,_57,_44,13
    13052681,EOZ~A___R_____S_____,_48,_42,_6
    13052682,EOZ~AMNP__D_*___Fc__,103,_74,29
    13052683,EOZ~AMNPR_D____G____,_54,_42,12
    13052684,EOZ~AMNPR_D_*___F___,112,_87,25
    13052685,EOZ_AMNPRCD____G____,_79,_66,13
    13052686,_O__AMNPR_D__X_GF___,_49,_32,17
    13052687,EOZ~AMNP__D_____F___,_50,_31,19
    13052688,_O__AMNP_CD__X__F___,_49,_34,15
    13052690,EOZ~AMNPR_D___S_____,_69,_58,11
    13052691,_O__AMNP__D_*XSG____,_67,_49,18
    13052692,_O__AMNPR_D_*_______,_59,_42,17
    13052693,EOZ~AMNP__D__X__F___,_91,_59,32
    13052694,EOZ~AMNP__D__X______,_51,_35,16
    13052695,_O__AMNP__D__X______,_51,_39,12
    13052696,EO__AMNPRCD_____F___,_79,_62,17
    13052697,EOZ~AMNP__D____GF___,_56,_40,16
    13052698,_O__AMNPR_D_________,_49,_36,13
    13052699,_O__AMNP__D__X__F___,_49,_35,14
    13052700,_O__AMNP__D__XSGF___,_59,_39,20
    13052701,_O__A___R______G____,_56,_45,11
    13052702,EOZ~AMNP_CD_________,_35,_27,_8
    13052703,EOZ~AMNP_CD_*X______,_88,_59,29
    13052705,_OZ~A_______*_______,_69,_57,12
    13052706,EOZ~AMNPR_D__XS_F___,_68,_53,15
    13052707,EOZ~AMNPRCD_________,_54,_44,10
    13052708,_O__AMNPR_D__X__F___,105,_76,29
    13052710,EOZ~AMNPR_D_*_SGF___,_80,_64,16
    13052712,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_50,_38,12
    13052713,EOZ~A___R_____S_____,_64,_49,15
    13052714,EOZ~AMNP__D____GF___,_98,_68,30
    13052715,_O__A___R_____S__c__,_27,_24,_3
    13052716,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_56,_46,10
    13052717,EOZ~A_______________,_50,_40,10
    13052718,_O__A___R___________,_22,_17,_5
    13052719,EOZ~A___R___________,_56,_46,10
    13052720,EOZ~AMNPR_D____G____,_51,_42,_9
    13052721,_O__A_______________,_21,_17,_4
    13052722,EOZ~AMNPR_D____GF___,_58,_48,10
    13052724,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_44,_30,14
    13052725,EOZ~____R_____SG____,_51,_41,10
    13052726,EOZ~AMNP__D_____F___,_64,_51,13
    13052727,EOZ~A_______________,_38,_31,_7
    13052728,EOZ~AMNP_CD__X______,_85,_67,18
    13052729,EOZ~A____C__*_______,_62,_51,11
    13052730,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_47,_36,11
    13052731,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_45,_30,15
    13052732,EOZ~AMNPR_D_*XSGF___,110,_89,21
    13052733,_OZ~A___R_____SG____,_98,_78,20
    13052734,EOZ~AMNP__D_*__GF___,_75,_48,27
    13052735,_O__A_______*_S_____,_35,_30,_5
    13052736,EOZ~AMN__CD_*___F___,107,_78,29
    13052737,EOZ~AMNP_CD_*___F___,113,_80,33
    13052738,EO__A___R___*_______,_85,_76,_9
    13052739,EOZ~AMNPR_D_*X__Fc__,180,141,39
    13052740,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_81,_61,20
    13052741,EOZ~AMNPR_D__X__F___,_84,_69,15
    13052742,_O__AMNP__D_*_SG____,_61,_49,12
    13052743,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X__F___,_61,_47,14
    13052744,EOZ~A_________S__c__,_55,_47,_8
    13052745,EOZ~A___R______G____,_38,_32,_6
    13052746,_O__A___R___*____c__,_59,_39,20
    13052747,EOZ~A_______*__G____,_47,_41,_6
    13052748,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X_GF___,_60,_44,16
    13052749,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_61,_51,10
    13052750,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_49,_37,12
    13052751,_O__AMNPR_D_*_______,_54,_42,12
    13052752,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_48,_32,16
    13052753,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_62,_42,20
    13052754,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X_G____,_67,_45,22
    13052755,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____Fc__,_68,_53,15
    13052756,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_51,_41,10
    13052757,EOZ~AMNPR_D____GF___,107,_83,24
    13052758,EOZ~AMNPRCD__XS_F___,_92,_63,29
    13052759,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X__F___,_83,_52,31
    13052760,_O__AMNP__D__X__F___,_38,_26,12
    13052761,EOZ~A__________G____,_62,_48,14
    13052762,EOZ~AMNP__D______c__,_66,_51,15
    13052763,EO__AMNPRCD__X______,_63,_38,25
    13052764,EOZ~A___R___*_______,116,_97,19
    13052765,EOZ~AMNP__D_*X__F___,_71,_51,20
    13052767,EOZ~AMNPRCD__X_GF___,_97,_69,28
    13052768,EOZ~AMNPRCD_____F___,288,205,83
    13052769,EOZ~AMNPR_D_*_S_____,_73,_56,17
    13052770,EOZ~AMNP__D_____F___,_48,_39,_9
    13052771,EOZ~A___R___*_______,_51,_44,_7
    13052772,EO__A_________SG____,_33,_29,_4
    13052773,EOZ~AMNP__D_____F___,_63,_51,12
    13052774,_O__AMNPR_D__X_GF___,_59,_38,21
    13052775,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_67,_50,17
    13052776,EOZ~AMNP__D_*_S_F___,100,_81,19
    13052777,EOZ~AMN__CD_________,105,_88,17
    13052778,EOZ~AMNP_CD___S_____,_87,_64,23
    13052779,EOZ~AMNPR_D__XS_F___,120,102,18
    13052780,EOZ~AMNP__D_*__G____,_80,_63,17
    13052781,EOZ~A___RC__*_______,_60,_53,_7
    13052782,EOZ~AMNP__D_____F___,_38,_28,10
    13052783,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_51,_40,11
    13052785,_O__AMNP__D__XS_____,_52,_39,13
    13052786,EOZ~A____C__________,_30,_25,_5
    13052787,_O__AMNP__D_____F___,_61,_42,19
    13052788,EOZ~AMNPR_D__X_GF___,170,137,33
    13052789,_O__AMNPR_D_____F___,_41,_30,11
    13052790,EOZ~A_______________,_29,_25,_4
    13052791,_O__A_______*_S_____,_54,_43,11
    13052792,EOZ~AMNPRCD__XS_Fc__,138,103,35
    13052793,EO__A_______*_______,_76,_56,20
    13052794,_O__AMNPRCD_________,_52,_37,15
    13052795,EOZ~AMNPR_D___S_F___,_60,_43,17
    13052796,EOZ~A___R___________,_34,_34,_0
    13052797,EOZ~AMNP__D_____F___,_44,_34,10
    13052798,_O__AMNPR_D__XS_F___,_87,_64,23
    13052799,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,102,_82,20
    13052800,EOZ~A___R_____S_____,_47,_35,12
    13052801,_O__AMNPR_D___S_____,_47,_33,14
    13052802,EOZ~AMNPR_D__XS_F___,_73,_58,15
    13052803,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_39,_30,_9
    13052804,EOZ~A___R___*__G____,_55,_48,_7
    13052806,EOZ~AMNPR_D______c__,_54,_45,_9
    13052807,EOZ~AMNP_CD__X__F___,_98,_65,33
    13052808,EO__AMNPRCD_*___F___,_69,_55,14
    13052809,EOZ~AMNP__D__X__F___,_43,_32,11
    13052810,EOZ~AMNP__D_________,_48,_38,10
    13052811,EOZ~A_________S_____,_53,_43,10
    13052812,EOZ~AMNP__D___S_F___,_63,_48,15
    13052813,EOZ~AMNP_CD_*X_GF___,_88,_62,26
    13052814,EOZ~A___R_____S_____,100,_88,12
    13052815,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_46,_37,_9
    13052816,EOZ~AMNP__D_*_S_____,_86,_65,21
    13052817,_O__AMNPR_D_____F___,_50,_34,16
    13052818,EOZ~AMNP__D____G____,_74,_57,17
    13052819,_O__AMNPR_D_________,_67,_53,14
    13052820,EOZ~AMNP_CD_*_______,_68,_53,15
    13052821,EOZ~AMNPRCD_____F___,_64,_52,12
    13052822,_O__A___R___*_S_____,134,106,28
    13052823,EOZ~AMNP__D_*XS_____,_72,_56,16
    13052824,_O__AMNPR_D____GF___,_60,_42,18
    13052825,EOZ~A_________S_____,_37,_30,_7
    13052826,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_64,_51,13
    13052827,EOZ~AMNPRCD__XS_F___,_67,_52,15
    13052828,EOZ~AMNPR_D_________,_67,_53,14
    13052829,EOZ~AMNPRCD__X__F___,123,_96,27
    13052830,EOZ~A___R___________,_72,_64,_8
    13052831,EOZ~AMNP__D__XS_F___,_67,_54,13
    13052832,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,_97,_83,14
    13052833,_O__AMNPR_D_________,_56,_44,12
    13052834,EOZ~A_________S_____,_40,_38,_2
    13052835,_O__AMNP__D_________,_47,_34,13
    13052836,EOZ~AMNP__D_*___F___,_76,_59,17
    13052837,EO__A_______*_______,_35,_27,_8
    13052838,_O__AMNP_CD__X______,_54,_43,11
    13052839,EOZ~AMNPRCD__X__F___,123,_99,24
    13052840,_O__A___R___________,_26,_24,_2
    13052841,_O__A_______________,_39,_32,_7
    13052842,_O__A___R___________,_22,_20,_2
    13052843,EOZ~A___R___*__G____,_57,_46,11
    13052845,EOZ~AMNPR_D__X__F___,_55,_40,15
    13052846,EOZ~AMNPR_D_____F___,107,_78,29
    13052847,_O__AMNP_CD__X_GF___,_63,_46,17
    13052848,EOZ~A___R___*_______,106,_67,39
    13052849,_O__A_______________,_34,_29,_5
    13052850,EOZ~A_______________,_34,_29,_5
    13052851,_O__AMNP__D____GF___,_44,_34,10
    13052852,EO__AMNPRCD_________,_44,_33,11
    13052853,_O__AMNPR_D___SGF___,_73,_52,21
    13052854,EOZ~A___R_____S_____,_46,_41,_5
    13052855,_O__A___RC__________,_37,_29,_8
    13052856,_O__AMNPRCD_____F___,_62,_47,15
    13052857,_O__AMNPR_D_____F___,_57,_43,14