0

In drafting patent various features are decribed by refernce numerals. cannot use brackets, inverted commas, circles or outline. But if a feature 101 has a surface bonded to another feature 102 with a surface it is difficult to indicate the interface bond as all that is shown on the drawings is a single line. My thought is to use the ~ tilde symbol and the >< symbol in combination with the feature referecne numeral. for example in the above example a three leader line to the same interface line would refer to: feature 101 (for example a limb portion) has leader lines to a surface 101~a that is bonded using an adhesive 101>a< that bonds surface 101~a to a second surface 102~a of second limb portion 102b. There is a similar issue when referencing holes in a limb portion of a feature and fixings where a fixing 200 is fixed in a hole 200a and a pin 3000 is retained in a second hole in limb 200b of a feature. A two leader lines to the fixing and the pin could be referring to the hole, the limb portion, the fixing or the pin. Could therefore the ^ symbol be used e.g a limb potion 200b has a first hole 200^a and second threaded hole 200^b where the first hole retains a pin 300 and the second hole engages a fixing bolt 200^1.

The ~,><,and ^ symbols are not brackets, inverted commas, circles or an outline All of which appear in the "BASIC LATIN" keyboard symbols layout in microsoft word.

Improve this question
6
  • What makes this more clear and readable compared to more conventional notation ?
    – George White ♦
    Jul 27 at 15:47
  • Do you plan on an expanded, exaggerated schematic view where each thing mentioned can be a distinct line?
    – George White ♦
    Jul 27 at 15:50
  • According to Euorpean Patent office a feature is indicated by a plain leader line and a surface by an arrowed leader line. Imagine 3 cubes the LH & RH cube have bond surfaces facing the middle cube, the middle one has two surfaces facing L & R an adhesive bonds both LH & RH to middle cube. The bonds and surfaces are a single line on the drawing and I want differentiate what surface is bonded to which surface and what the bond is. An Arrowed and plain leader does differentiate hence the symbols n>x< bond, n~x a surface. Leaders to holes fixings also need to be differentiated e.g. ^x and ^n
    – logikman
    Jul 28 at 19:36
  • Following on from the above a feature 100A could have two bond surfaces 100A~a and 100A~b. Surface where surface 100A~a is bonded to another feature 101A that has abond surface 101A~a by adhesive 102>a<. The second surface 100A~b of feature 100A is bonded to a third feature 103A and this has 3 bond surfacea 103A~a, 103A~b and 103A~c where only bond surface 103A~b is bonded to second surface 101A~2 by a second adhesive 103>b<. Leader lines with just a number reference would simply point to a line that has no indication of what the line represents.
    – logikman
    Jul 28 at 19:50
  • @logikman I highly encourage you to post a formal answer. You obviously have a lot of relevant knowledge.
    – Eric S ♦
    Jul 31 at 2:48

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
1

Having spoken to a patent examiner in the Uk IPO it appears that the use of "><", "~" and "^" symbols to indicate a bond n><, a surface n~ a hole ^x or fixing ^n would be acceptable in the UK. Where "n" is a numeral and "x" is letter. It does not Necessarily follow that the same would apply in other patent Jurisdictions.

Improve this answer
0

Probably allowed but inventing your own notation convention may not make it easier to read.

Improve this answer
3
  • Thanks George. Perhaps if I have "invented" a new notation I should have patented it ? but now its online here I guess " the Genie is out" so no patentable invention here !!!
    – logikman
    Jul 31 at 8:02
  • I hope you don’t think a notation system is patentable subject matter.
    – George White ♦
    Jul 31 at 15:27
  • Not at all !!! I have now spoken to a UK Patent Examiner at the IPO and she is quite relaxed about the use of the >, ~ and ^ symbols in reference numerals. Her view is that examiners have to be pragmatic and providing the symbols used are defined as to their meaning and use in a preamble to the description then they would actually assist understanding what is being referenced in a drawing by interface/boundary lines between features or elements in the patent.
    – logikman
    Aug 1 at 16:45

You must log in to answer this question.

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