Windows 7 Key USPTO Won’t Accept Upside Down Faxe

[mornning8303]

I understand,Windows 7 Key, the headline appears like a joke. In any case,Windows 7 Ultimate, what do you do if somebody inadvertently fed a page upside down into the fax machine? You just turn the page more than or, any time you get an electronic edition, utilize the reader program to rotate it. Apparently this can be not within the standard operating procedures for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. No, in case your fax is available in upside down, they deliver you a message in return declaring that they can’t accept it and to re-fax. Here’s a copy on the letter that a source, who regularly deals with the USPTO,Office 2007 Standard, passed along to me:
I’ve sharpened it a bit with Photoshop, but in case you still find it hard to read, here’s the text:
SubmitterUnited States Patent and Trademark Office
Notice of Document Faxed Upside Down
Your request to record a document in the United States Patent and Trademark Workplace was received via digital fax on [date and time in 2010 omitted].
The faxed submission was received upside down. We are unable to continue processing these images.
Please resubmit your document.
If you happen to have any questions,Office 2010 Professional Plus, you may contact our customer service center at [number omitted].
Workplace of Public Records
Usually when I see something really peculiar,Windows 7 Key, I try to put myself in the place of the person doing what appears inane and think of reasons why perhaps it makes more sense than it looks. Only, I can’t see any possible reason. What, it’s faster to deliver a fax in return and wait for a response? They don’t have technology that allows turning the images around? Maybe the patent for that particular nicety of image processing is lost somewhere, probably filed upside down.
If they get the 15 percent increase in fees, will they at least agree to rotate the images? So much for radical improvement. I still can’t get more than that they appear to have a form letter for this.
[UPDATE: Despite the many questions that people have raised, it turns out that the USPTO does not have a good reason for this silliness. You can see more details at my latest coverage on the story.]