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

IP Data Corporation


Individual patents or small quantities of image copies for applications and patents, plus file prosecution histories and other IP services may be ordered through our Automated Patent Library System menu and forms (APLS). To sign-up for APLS, Click the APLS Logon menu item and click the REGISTER link as the bottom of the page. There is no fee to sign-up for APLS to see what is available.  


This section introduces our bulk patent data collections with a link at the bottom that will take you to our Details page which also has links for samples of the data and copies of our MAPS Patent Data Format Specification.

We currently have the following Full Text Collections available in MAPS and MAPS-XML formats:

  • US Applications and Patents, 
  • WO (Patent Cooperation Treaty) Applications,
  • EP (European Patent Office) Applications and Patents, 

We also have Abstract Collections in English for the following Authorities in our MAPS or MAPS-XML formats:

  • US  -  Applications and Patents, 
  • WO - Patent Cooperation Treaty Applications (A1 and A2 Kind Pubs),
  • EP  - European Patent Office Applications (A1 and A2 Kind Pubs), 
  • JP   - Japanese Patent Office - this is not JAPIO XML formatted data),

The JP Abstracts are not in JAPIO format, no software is included for viewing, this is only the raw data files. They also have added fields such as the DOCDB Family ID and CPC Classifications if they were assigned by the EPO in the DOCDB collection.

Complete multi-page 300 dpi facsimile versions of the Full Text collections (listed above) are also available in TIF or PDF format. Front pages of patents and applications are also available for the same collections.

All of the above patent publications are available as annual subscriptions updated weekly that subscribers can access via FTP or HTTP.  Over 40 megabits of "enterprise quality" fiber optic  bandwidth is available to support our subscribers.

The latest MAPS Patent Text Data Specification, collection descriptions, approximate collections sizes and weekly subscription information, plus links to sample data are all available on the Patent Data Collections detailed information page at the link below:  

        Patent Data Collections 


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.