0

If my invention has several innovative features, is it best to file separate patents for each feature, or for the device as a whole, or both?

  • Depends. What do you want to achieve, how much money do you have to spend? – DonQuiKong Nov 27 '18 at 16:46
  • I want to make the strongest case for approval of my patent. While the device has a similar function to others already available, it accomplishes the purpose in a new way and incorporates components that are my own designs and have not previously been combined in similar devices. I haven't filed a patent before and don't have any idea of the money required. – Ebgineer Dec 1 '18 at 1:06
1

I’ll start with a statistical answer. Each patent you file has a certain chance of being rejected, which can be a long drawn out process and you might give up. So if you file several patent applications in parallel, you are likelier to obtain at least one patent covering your system sooner. We often do this when we want to get a portfolio up fast - we file several patent applications, all with a request for expedited examination and hope to get 50% within a year.

There are practical considerations (other than money), as well. While you may have several innovative features, they may have many interdependencies. It may be difficult to capture these if you have separate patents. If you have a single specification and multiple claim sets, this means that a flaw in the specification can make the whole set of patents fall down.

There are scope considerations as well. If the ideas are independently innovative, you might want separate filings so you can explore and highlight how the different inventions are independent and have a scope broader than just the product.

There are litigation issues as well. Having multiple patents makes it more difficult for competitor to design around, more difficult for competitor to invalidate your patents and easier for you to choose the best patents/claims to sue on. Hopefully competitor will be so scared he will ask for a license. As a general rule, we assume that any give single patent will be invalidated or designed around.

Finally, putting budget aside, your goal is to obtain an granted independent claim for each of the innovative features and for the product as a whole and for various sub-combinations of features. I am assuming, by the way, that when you say “innovative” you actually mean “a patentable feature which is critical for my competition’s success” , since we file patents on what blocks competition, not (merely) on what is innovative. Note a competitor will often not copy your product as a whole but rather incorporate one or more of its features.

Of course, budget (and cash flow) cannot be put aside and the overarching question should be: what kind of protection can I both afford and answers my business needs.

0

For light bulb Edison's one patent was sufficient to prevent competitors from infringing his invention. But current day where knowledge is abundant and available at finger tips and due to the competition and case law created from numerous patent cases owning single patent would be risky. If Competitors are successful in circumventing the claim you are left with nothing to defend. My suggestion is file a single patent application but before grant file a continuation application or divisional application which would support you to add additional claims upon evaluation of the competitor product.

  • You might want to expand on this a bit. It is very possible that the patent examiner might force you to split a patent application into two or more applications if they believe there are two or more distinct inventions. This has happened to me. – Eric Shain Nov 28 '18 at 15:15
  • Welcome to Ask patents! This is kinda correct, but lacks a lot of information. A source for the Edison claim would be nice. If your application is bad, having a continuation won't help you. If your claim is good, a continuation is not needed. You're not mentioning the costs of this strategy. What about different inventions, one or more applications? What about formulating a broad claim and deciding on the fly? Etc. – DonQuiKong Nov 29 '18 at 12:08
  • US223898A is the only patent with only four claims, i couldint find any continuity application data so i assume this is the only patent that have covered electric lamp. – RishiM_IPR Dec 4 '18 at 5:54
  • It might be noted that a incandescent bulb using a tungsten filament would avoid infringement on US223898A so it isn't as strong as you think. – Eric Shain Jan 25 at 20:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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