Timeline for Possible to include information in patent application refuting similar patents ahead of time?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 30, 2014 at 16:47 | vote | accept | Anonguy123 | ||
| Oct 30, 2014 at 16:40 | comment | added | Anonguy123 | Thanks bob, really appreciate the thorough responses. Have a good one! | |
| Oct 28, 2014 at 20:25 | comment | added | bobfandango | I should add, estoppel is not completely on point here, as its application requires amendments to the claims. But disclaimer is certainly something to be concerned about. More generally, your arguments may not be correct, or you may later think about things in a different way and once you've characterized something in a certain way, you're likely stuck with that. It's all very grey unfortunately, and is so often the case with the law, it's probably better to say nothing unless and until it is required, and only then after careful consideration. | |
| Oct 28, 2014 at 20:19 | comment | added | bobfandango | It isn't that per se. Look up prosecution history estoppel and prosecution history disclaimer. Statements you make during prosecution can later serve to limit the scope of the claims. Thus, it is best to avoid characterizing and/or describing your invention and the claims. Obviously, the specification will describe the invention and thereby limit the scope of the claims. But best practice is to avoid creating additional limitations with the arguments you make to the PTO. | |
| Oct 28, 2014 at 19:18 | comment | added | Anonguy123 | What's the particular thought process behind this? I assume something like "see if he catches it first"? | |
| Oct 28, 2014 at 18:42 | review | First posts | |||
| Oct 29, 2014 at 20:00 | |||||
| Oct 28, 2014 at 18:36 | history | answered | bobfandango | CC BY-SA 3.0 |