704 W Park Ave Suite C
 Edgewater FL 32132-1409
 Ph 800-832-2823
 Fx 208-631-6381
 Outside the US:

IP Data Corporation


General Information

IP Data Corporation is a privately held Class C corporation. We incorporated in 1998 in Alexandria, Virginia. Early in 2003 we moved to Edgewater Florida where the corporation was officially domesticated with the Department of State in Florida. As a service and information oriented company, our customers needs, requests and comments are the single largest driving force behind our policies and products - and we do listen, closely. We work with associates who surround the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office like a tight knit family. Our management and staff have been processing patent data in some form since 1993, and our extensive experience with Internet delivery of data and complex software engineering know-how provides us with a sharp competitive edge in several key fields related to data storage, conversion and delivery, as well as data organization and advanced search tools that are difficult, if not close to impossible to find elsewhere.

We consult with, and assist other IP data firms on the technical aspects of the patent data from the largest, most popular sources, and we continue to improve current products, data quality, and our IP data inventory, as well as designing and experimenting with new products and systems to make our customer's jobs easier.

Basic Business Policies

The most important people in our business are our clients. Some companies say this, but looking at some of the practices we see in this induistry, it apparently isn't as important as of ten as it is cliamed. We focus on customer service of existing clients ahead of all other functions we perform. More than once we have had to turn down new business to ensure we could take care of long standing client's needs. No one likes to admit this, but if we take you on as a client, you will understand and come to appreciate this level of dedication as a customer. Slow, steady growth, and DEPENDABLE PRODUCTS along with keeping all of our clients happy is the end result, and we sleep better each night for this attitude, as well.

It is our choice that people answer our phones, instead of a machine. If you call and a machine answers, I assure you that it is either after hours (and we often answer when closed), or that we are very busy. I can also assure you that it won't happen very often. If you have a problem with our services or any of our products, please let us know and we will take steps to correct the issue immediately. If a product or service we provide does not meet our advertised standards, or accepted industry standards that you have come to expect, we will solve the problem to your satisfaction, immediately. 

We do not, nor will we at any time in the future, out-source any of our processes, product development or support functions outside of the United States. This decision is based on our desire to provide our clients with the very best products and services IN A TIMELY FASHION, and we feel that it is best accomplished with direct hands-on management which is difficult to carry out half way around the world, and we also feel that the people that service your needs should be a part of, and responsible for, the company with which you do business.

The Past & Future 

IP Data Corporation started out as Sensory Publishing, Inc. in 1998 publishing technical, non-fiction and fiction titles in both print and electronic formats along with designing our own custom software to process and format the text and images for print publishing. In 2002 we shifted to focus on patent books from the Dept of Commerce and added patent data and search software to our offerings. Im 2015, for the sake of the environment, we decided to stop killing trees (printing books) and the summer of 2016 was our last printing. We highly recommend that everyone go electroinc for their patent books and manuals, for that same reason. 

Our Patent Data Search Systems are available for both private, dedicated use for firms (in their offices), and online subscription based searching for everyone.   

Thank you for taking the time to read this important information. As always, if you have questions or comments about our policies, services or products, please call us at 800-832-2823. We will be very happy to speak with you. 


Christy Bartholomew
Executive Vice President


Same US Patents, Different CPC Classifications.   WHY? 

The USPTO MCF data began in late 2015, and almost immediately we noticed differences between the MCF and DOCDB for the same US patents. The differences were not trivial. 30 days later we started our project to track and analyze these differences. 

We mistakenly assumed that the USPTO sent DOCDB updates to the EPO with CPC classes in them, and the EPO used them.  But as it turns out, US patents are classified by both authorities, and not always in the same Groups and Sub-Groups. A small number were even found to be in totally different sub-classes and a few were not even in the same class  (all of these appeared to be mistakes and were fixed fairly quickly). 

Early results indicated it was a learning curve. The EPO had a decent headstart with the new CPC since it has its roots in ECLA, the EPO's previous system, with both based on the ST.8 standard (with minor differences). For the USPTO, it was a brand new ball game with a different set of rules. Frankly, the thought of training 9000 or so examiners on a new Class system in 12 to 18 months conjureed up images of hearding cats...  while wearing a blindfold. To the USPTO's credit, we began to see far fewer differences in less than 8 or 9 month (summer of 2016).  We are now headed into the winter of 2017, and thankfully, they are growing even closer.  

If you build your own search system, this could be a problem for your searchers. If not, does your current search provider index both sets?

Searching by classification is the most popular method for professional searchers, and depending on the type of search, a good searcher will often "eyeball" EVERY document in the Sub-Groups of interest. This can be hundreds of documents, or even a thousand or two depending on the technology.

The following questions remain:

1)  Whose CPC data is more accurate?

2) They will ever match exactly- No-  so how close will they get?

3) How will this affect your class searches?

4) Is it wise to index both sets of CPC data into one system?  (we think so - just ignore the duplicates!)

5)  CPC data for Reissue patents is still not included in the U.S. MCF. Will it ever be?

We will continue to acquire Reissue CPC data from DOCDB for our subscribers in our standard CSV file format until the USPTO supplies it.