@gregg_appcoll Understood about the privacy issues--if the addendum feature could be added, that would be great and honestly seems like it would address most of the issues.

Ideally it would be implemented in a way that allowed for admins to specify one or more individuals that should receive the email warning, and to specify when it was sent (it would be great it if it could be a) when a contact record with an unlisted customer number is saved and b) on a regular scheduled basis, e.g., on the 1st of each month).

Although, it seems like the automated approach could be implemented, but with a check to make it so that if there are two accounts listing the same customer number, then permission is sought from the first before authorizing the second. I mean, if I enter another customer's customer number into the settings page and save it, it's still there, right? You just don't enable it until permission is granted?

Thank you both for the suggestions. We will pass this onto engineering for consideration. We hope this helps.

Hi Darin,

Could you submit a formal request to support@appcoll.com to set up a call to get you comfortable with this type of setup?

Thanks.

@gregg_appcoll adding onto the Power of Attorney yes/no. It would be helpful if a POA form could be linked to the actual contact (assignee or inventor)

@gregg_appcoll Thanks, Greg, however I would still find it very helpful to have a syntax for an alternate field, when a first field is blank. As I previously noted, I have several situations where such a syntax would be helpful:

(a) a client-specific USPTO customer number (if the client has one), or the firm's customer number (if the client doesn't have one) (Some of my clients want me to use their customer number, rather than mine. I have templates for responses to Office Actions, etc. that include a customer number in the document headers)

(b) a client-specific USPTO deposit account number (if the client has one), or the firm's deposit account number (if the client doesn't have one). (My template responses include boilerplate language authorizing charges to a deposit account, in case of a missed extension of time.)

(c) actual filing date or official filing date or priority date, depending on what is available. (For example, when calculating due dates for foreign applications.)

Thanks,
George

Hi George, thanks for reporting. This issue should be resolved soon.

Hi Kevin, thanks for the feedback. This feature is being worked on and should be available in the future.

Hi Sadiq - thanks for the suggestion. We'll certainly look into this.

Hello Kate and Melissa,

This is a good idea and something we have formally submitted to our engineering team as a new feature. It may take some time, but it will be added. Thanks for your continued feedback.

@gregg_appcoll Missed this! Sorry! I just reached out. Thank you.

Hi Michael. Thanks for the feedback. Did you know that AppColl can create one invoice per matter in a bulk operation? This may alleviate the issue you have with multiple users trying to create multiple client-specific invoices. Now, as you know, this will not allow for editing multiple invoices by multiple users simultaneously.

@JohnG8374

This is a significant project that we have formally added to our project list. This may take quite a bit of time.

Thanks.

@WendyZ2824 We reached out and are awaiting a response from him.

@KarenH9267 Thank you for your feedback. This is a great suggestion. We will certainly pass this on to engineering for consideration.

The way to do this is to click the checkbox at the top of the page, which will show you all open tasks. From there, you can update these tasks in bulk. We hope this helps.