In reference to the patent: US8317762

Does the patent still hold if the product does not use the same material, and some different ingredients?

To determine freedom-to-operate, you must carefully review the claims. To infringe on a patent, you need to include every element of at least one claim. This patent has two independent claims. Here they are:

  1. A skin patch for absorbing toxins from a body comprising:

    a first side comprising a heat reflective foil comprising titanium;

    a second side comprising a non-woven rayon surface configured for absorbing and retaining the toxins, said rayon surface comprising a plurality of openings configured for enhancing transmission of far infrared ray emission into a skin when said second side is placed in contact with the skin;

    and a mixture of natural ingredients consisting of, by weight, 24% vinegar, 0.8% chitosan, 0.8% loquat leaf, 0.8% houttuynia cordata, 0.8% vitamin C, 60% tourmaline, 4% vegetable fiber, and 8.8% dextrin, said mixture formulated to emit said far infrared ray emission, whereby blood circulation is promoted and perspiration and any toxins contained therein are absorbed by said rayon surface.

and

  1. A skin patch for absorbing toxins from a body comprising:

    means for reflecting heat from far infrared ray emissions;

    means for absorbing and retaining the toxins; means for enhancing transmission of far infrared ray emissions into a skin;

    and means for emitting said far infrared ray emissions, whereby blood circulation is promoted and perspiration and any toxins contained therein are absorbed by said absorbing means;

    wherein said skin patch contains a mixture of natural ingredients consisting of by weight, 24% vinegar, 0.8% chitosan, 0.8% loquat leaf, 0.8% houttuynia cordata, 0.8% vitamin C, 60% tourmaline, 4% vegetable fiber, and 8.8% dextrin.

These claims are remarkably specific so I would think they would be reasonably easy to circumvent. Perhaps by leaving one of the ingredients out. That said, people actually pay good money to patent attorneys to get freedom-to-operate opinions so please don't consider this as one.

One thing to remember is that there is no burden to prove your invention actually works in order to obtain a patent. I've run across many patents that simply don't work as described. I'm not going to offer an opinion on this patent, but there are publications which research whether toxins are excreted with sweat. You might want to review those.

  • thank you eric that is very helpful! it is a very generic product based on japanese culture so i figured it would be difficult to patent the idea. – nadia sessions Nov 16 '17 at 17:52
  • @nadiasessions If the answer suits you, please consider accepting it by clicking on the check mark. – Eric Shain Nov 16 '17 at 19:33
  • Many pro se applicants continue to pursue their applications after rejections by amending the claims to narrow their scope to the extent they are practically worthless, but technically patentable over the cited prior art (e.g., it would not have been obvious to modify the prior art in such a way -- perhaps because it precludes any efficacy). – Upnorth Nov 27 '17 at 23:31
  • @Upnorth I completely agree with your comment. Do you wish me edit my answer? – Eric Shain Nov 27 '17 at 23:36
  • @Ericshain Not at all. – Upnorth Nov 28 '17 at 1:32

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.