New answers tagged

2

Usually a patent office will make you aware of publications, patents and patent applications that tend to show that your claims are either not new (not novel or anticipated) and/or are obvious (lack an inventive step or element). Any document published anywhere in the world in any language at any time before you filed can be used to show that your idea is ...


2

You don't state your country, but the general rule is that prior art anywhere in the world is prior art everywhere in the world. Thus you can't just patent in your country an invention found in any other country. This is not limited to patents. Any invention that is publicly disclosed is prior art. I always suggest working with a patent attorney when ...


1

This is a somewhat arbitrary question and I think you’ll get different answers from different people, based on their area of expertise. In order from most to least difficult to argue against, I would rank them as §101, §112, §102, §103. In order from most to least attorney time spent overcoming them, I would rank them as §103, §112, §102, §101. I'm not a ...


3

From my personal experience it is both 101, when the invention is a computer-implemented invention, and 103 rejections. The 101 rejections are a nightmare for me because with them it is alleged that the invention is nothing more than an abstract idea, yet most of the times that makes no sense from my point of view because the invention is a computer-...


1

This is a specific implementation of an abstract idea. So is it patentable? I'm not a lawyer, but in my opinion, the implementation is not sufficiently specific enough to merit a patent. Even if you get past the issue of novelty and obviousness (which is not a given), you haven't enabled the invention. You haven’t stated how you select the number and type ...


2

It is specific enough to not be just an idea but it might not be specific enough to avoid being obvious in light of previous knowledge (prior art). It also needs to be fleshed out in terms of the details of the best way you know to carry it out. It might be that someone already had the exact invention and either published it or applied for a patent. Then ...


1

The detailed description doesn't need to be particularly detailed however I have seen a case where a filing date was retracted on a provisional application (that would remove the ability to use the patent pending marking) because the only text was headed "Summary" and there wasn't much of it.


1

In Australia all you need to file a provisional patent application is a title, an inventor name and a description of the invention. You don't even need claims. But the problem with doing that is some countries require claims to be part of a provisional patent application for the purposes of deriving priority. Thus you would be very brave to file it without ...


Top 50 recent answers are included