1

Chain lubricating apparatus and method US 8567565 B2

This appears to be the same idea repackaged by different individuals for over 100 years. Is this a common practice?

Also can BKC renew the patent without a significant design change?

Improve this question
2
  • more relevant will be ask for prior-art, production and tech questions are off topic.
    – Pushpak
    Oct 12, 2015 at 6:15
  • If you are aware of prior art, why don't you provide examples and links in your question. Understand that while chain lubrication systems may be 100 years old, this doesn't preclude a new way of providing this functionality. As to patent terms, now a days, patents last 20 years from the application date and are not renewable.
    – Eric S ♦
    Mar 6, 2017 at 15:38

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

It is common in patents to find a new way to solve an old problem. I have no specific knowledge in chain lubrication techniques so I can't comment on whether this patent is novel. However, looking at the patent, there are ten patent citations reviewed by the examiner dating back to 1904. The examiner must have found the specific implementation as described in the claims sufficiently novel over those ten patents to allow this patent. It can be helpful to review the patent file at the US Public Pair website. Patent examiners typically review the patent literature, so if you have knowledge of prior art other than patents it may be of use in invalidating the patent.

As for your second question, since 1995, the term for patents is 20 years from the filing (or priority) date. They are not renewable.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .