The Stack Overflow podcast is back! Listen to an interview with our new CEO.
3

The invention In the US, there is a line of reasoning where if you describe a characteristic of the invention, that characteristic becomes mandatory. For example, if I write "the invention includes a widget", then whatever I claim must include a widget. If it's not included explicitly, it can be imported into the claim implicitly. This is a problem, if the ...


3

chempatents1981's answer is excellent and should be accepted. That said, I'd like to provide an alternative viewpoint. I am an inventor, not a patent lawyer. As such I don't have a specific financial interest in recommending using a patent lawyer rather than writing your own submission. Patent attorneys first need to get a degree in a technical field. All ...


3

I don't think you can simply proclaim hard-and-fast, universally applicable rules like this. A patent claim's addressee is a person having ordinary skill in the art, not a layperson or philologist, so inevitably, context will matter, just as the references you cited from IPWatchdog imply. Another issue concerning "one of A, B, and C" is that the words ...


3

The factors to be considered are (1) setting a background or context for the state of the art in the field of the invention and setting up the problem which the invention solves, and (2) giving the examiner admitted prior art. While a thorough description of the prior art may be good on a scientific level (showing that the inventor really understands the ...


2

Calling something a variation on an embodiment vs calling something a different embodiment is not likely to make a real difference. The important thing would be to get all of these different ways to do it with their slightly different outcomes on paper. The issue of something being a different "invention", technically, will be how the examiner (I am ...


2

Sorry for the short answer. At the level of a pro se provisional I would not worry about the title so much. I would have a separate section for the methods. Typically it would be text corresponding to a flow chart saying: "as seen in fig. x step s1xx is receiving the data packet by the widget which was produced by the foo." Method steps are ----ing. ...


2

It goes without saying (so I'll say it anyway!), primarily, it depends whether it's the best way of describing your invention. If the terms are appropriate (in meaning, and particular in breadth, so they support what you will want to claim), then there's no harm in using the same terms; I'm assuming of course that your differences are sufficient persuade ...


2

Is it okay to show just one way of performing step C? Yes. The relevant law is provided by 35 USC § 112(a), which provides (emphasis added): The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art ...


2

Patents are drafted with the aim to "fit" the legal background of the jurisdiction they belong, for example the US or the EPO. For every paragraph that seems to be repeating the same thing, there is an attorney who usually has something specific in mind (a rule or a legal decision that creates a specific landscape). One is not really taught how to draft ...


2

Whether it is good depends on your view of why you are applying for a patent. This gets a little philosophical. The classical view is that a patent protects an invention so that an inventor can exploit it with a limited monopoly. The value of the patent is inherently linked to how it enables the owner to exploit the underlying invention, and to prevent ...


2

In general there are many requirements and rules which may limit protection if a inventor files patent application of its own. But its a altogether myth that inventor cannot draft good patent application its another issue that he might have shorter claim but that can be covered if drafting is proper:- Its my personal recommendation that an Inventor should ...


2

These do sound like separate inventions. Patents are given for specific solutions, not to results. Three solutions to the same problem that are technically independent are not a single invention just because they address the same problem. If you have already filed a provisional application that discloses more than one invention it is not a problem. Many ...


1

Is this filing in the US, EPO or some other place? Background: Practice varies from place to place, but can be broadly bunched together under USPTO (Restriction) and PCT (Lack of Unity). In a majority of cases, it will end up with the same decision by all the patent office, but in some, it will not. I have seen several cases where the USPTO required the ...


1

In the US, the basic fee for a non-provisional patent application allows you to have 3 independent claims, and further independent claims can be included by paying additional fees. You can claim each solution as an independent claim, but the Examiner may force you to restrict the application to one or some of these solutions and move the other one or ones to ...


1

Words like "substantially" and "about" are heavily used in U.S. claims. A quick search of the USPTO's patent search database shows that close to 11% of all patents assigned to Apple, Inc., at issue, have "substantially" in a claim. That includes 4 of the 31 utility patents issued to them July 31, 2018. Yes, those words can come back to bite you, as can ...


1

In general words like "substantially" or "approximately" should be avoided in claims. That does not mean that the claims will be invalid automatically but it is an invitation for scrutiny. As long a person having ordinary skill in the art would understand what substantially meant, it is acceptable. MPEP 2173.02 provides the criteria for determining if a ...


1

Phrasing for "at least one" "At least one network destination" means that a situation in which there is only one network destination would still be covered. "At least one of/among a plurality of network destinations" means that there must be more than one network destination for the claim to be literally infringed, otherwise there would be no plurality. ...


1

I am an inventor and have worked with quite a few patent attorneys both inside and outside my company. In every case, the patents were written using Microsoft Word. It is important to understand that the drafting of an application is an iterative process where the attorney/agent creates a draft and the inventor(s) review and comment. This pretty much limits ...


1

You can use embodiment instead of object. A common expression is also "as described herein" so you don't have to repeat all the time "the present invention". But I don't see how you can skip the word "invention" 100%, neither do I understand why one should do so. Also, I don't agree that the advantages are optional, in the sense that, no one obliges you to ...


1

Supporting answer to part of query:- ..... If there is any online course on drafting patents, please let me know.... You can enroll to WIPO drafting course which is good for learning basic drafting:- WIPO Drafting Course


1

Should I add futuristic ideas to my provisional? You should add a futuristic idea if: You can describe it in enough detail that a reader could put it into practice. If the reader could not put it into practice, the description would be non-enabling. A claim to it would therefore not be allowed. It could influence the overall patentability of the claimed ...


1

English grammar First, there is no definitive English grammar. As opposed to other languages which have regulatory bodies, English is wild and lawless. Writers of English grammar books set out what they believe a typical speaker would use, but it is fundamentally nothing more than one writer's opinion. The standard of interpretation Notionally, the ...


1

Claim 1 of US 7346650 contains two colons. There is nothing particularly special or notable about this patent, it's just the first one I came across. Using multiple colons in a claim is not especially rare. There is no formal limit to the number of colons usable in a claim, as long as their use does not affect the clarity of the claim. Looking ...


1

In the US, the key question would be whether the general concept (or "genus") is sufficiently described by the examples (or "species"). MPEP § 2163 is comprehensive, and summarises the current law on this point well. The key passage is: The written description requirement for a claimed genus may be satisfied through sufficient description of a ...


1

You must describe the preferred embodiment, but you do not need to state which of several embodiments is the preferred one.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible