21

I found answer on the USPTO web-site: Patents are published as part of the terms of granting the patent to the inventor. Subject to limited exceptions reflected in 37 CFR 1.71(d) & (e) and 1.84(s) , the text and drawings of a patent are typically not subject to copyright restrictions. The inventors' right to exclude others from making, using, ...


7

Practice differs across jurisdictions worldwide. The idea is the same behind all of them, but usually the tools to analyze enablement are different. I think patent attorneys don't like broad claims because they know it is tough to support them and the danger of having an invalid claim granted lures around. The applicant, unfortunately, is in most cases very ...


5

"33kz0r" is wrong. The patent grant is a U.S. Government work, and is never copyrighted. However, the application and hence the grant could contain copyrighted images illustrating certain points, but they would have to be clearly marked with copyright information at the time of the application. The drawings required as part of the application are works ...


4

The USPTO tries to follow the law and the rules. To show a person skilled in the art how to make and use an invention doesn't mean you need to give them production blueprints - especially in the "predictable arts". Also, the implementation the inventor describes doesn't need to work particularly well. One way to think about it might be "is there more ...


4

Yes - you can use the boilerplate paragraphs. They likely won't hurt you but are unlikely to help you much. If you get a judge who thinks you "only get what the inventor actually invented" it doesn't add anything specific to the disclosure to enlarge the scope of what the judge decides you "actually invented". If you get a judge who thinks you get what the ...


3

Q. "Can it then be written up as a separate application?" A. Yes. Each of the two regular applications should claim priority to the provisional application which you have already filed. To do that, the regular applications must both be filed within one year of the provisional filing date. The inventors of the two regular applications are not necessarily ...


3

Not every feature of your claim needs to be novel It would be a very rare invention that consists entirely of a new thing with no previously existing components. Instead, an invention typically relates to a known thing with a bunch of known features, along with something new. As such, claims to inventions will typically include a bunch of components which ...


3

Perhaps it's best to back up and consider the "social contract" a patent is intended to fulfill. You get protection for your patented invention until the patent expires. You, however, are expected to give something in return for that protection. Specifically, you're required to document your invention, revealing all its secrets, so that after the patent ...


3

The earlier answer makes the important point that it's difficult to know if you have good support for claims yet to be conceived. You can never avoid the danger entirely, but the more preparation you put into you patent even at a provisional stage, the better. I'd say do as much searching as you can, so you know the closest prior art (though I'm not a US ...


3

Copyrighted? Yes. Enforceable? Probably not. In the USA, the copyrighted nature of patents and applications for patents would, like anything else, initially depend upon when and how it was created and published. Prior to 1989 the publication was required to have a "proper copyright notice" or registration, but that is no longer the case. Works of US authors ...


3

The MPEP says reference characters are preferably numerical. Patent applications do not usually have "chapters" and there is no need to invent a convention like that. As mentioned, even numbers let you add a number later without worrying about re-numbering but renumbering would not be needed anyway. That is not true of drawings - they need to be in order. ...


2

For UK patent and patent application specifications published on or after 1 August 1989, copyright remains with the applicant or proprietor (apparently regardless of who drafted the application). (Earlier UK patent and patent application specifications are Crown copyright.) You are allowed to copy a UK patent specification to disseminate the information in ...


2

It frequently happens that person B invents a patentable improvement to person A's invention. If it is a compelling enough improvement it can be thought as a blocking patent. Neither A or B can independently make the improved version without the other. But just making it work efficiently or creating a specific, well-engineered, detailed embodiment is not ...


2

With apologies to the OP's narrow original question, given that questions involving distinct legal issues and non-US jurisdictions are being closed as duplicates, there are some points that I think need to be mentioned here. To summarize: given the lack of clear legal authority on copyright claims over patent materials in most countries, any blanket ...


2

The markings do not apply to you if line spacing is the only change to your documents. Submitting the corrected documents and including a note to the examiner about no new matter should satisfy the request. See posting.


2

This answer is not intended to constitute advice (I'm an inventor, not a patent attorney;) but rather provide perspective, based on my recent software patent application, filed in 2016. In drafting the non-provisional, I engaged a patent attorney who specializes in my sub-field. The draft was reviewed by two advisory patent attorneys, one in tech and one ...


2

The specification explains the invention with detail and with multiple embodiments and variations on those embodiments. It does not necessarily single out the novel aspects from the rest of the description. Claims define what you are claiming to be yours. The analogy used is of a prospector defining the boundaries of a mining claim. If somebody does ...


1

I am not a US expert so I hope someone else will pop-in as well to add more info. But in a nutshell, there is a linkage between the date you disclose something and the disclosure itself and it is called "priority date". It seems that your attorney wants to ensure you get the maximum opportunities as possible and include this added feature to the PCT ...


1

Can I copy parts of applications that are not specific to the invention? Probably, but maybe not. The key issue comes down to whether your copying would infringe the original author's copyright. Whether the portion you copy relates to the technical implementation or relates more to the scope of the patent (what you call "lawyerspeak") is largely irrelevant ...


1

Yes, they are, and are used like you have mentioned. The most direct answer to your question is in the MPEP (here): The claims as filed in the original specification are part of the disclosure and, therefore, if an application as originally filed contains a claim disclosing material not found in the remainder of the specification, the applicant may amend ...


1

The specification, and not the original claims limit the available subject matter of amended claims. Therefore, new claims may be submitted as long as (per above) no new matter is introduced.


1

This is a design patent, so it's a patent that protects the appearance of this "peanut butter jar" with a tear-off strip in the middle. It doesn't protect a label that rips in the middle of the jar, because that's not what is illustrated. And what is protected is exactly what is shown in the figures.


1

Design Patent Claims:- ornamental design for a peanut butter jar. in my opinion It has something to do with opening of Jar with tear strip seal if it has been opened label will rip off. I tried to search inventor in Google but nothing extra ordinary came up.


1

Do not use the second format. That is the way the U.S. patent office formats it when they print it, not the way any patent office wants to get it from you. WIPO's format requirements are in the PCT Applicant's Guide. I am having trouble pasting in the URL but it comes up on a google search. It is written in a very bureaucratic manner.


1

In this framework example XYZ is a result. Results are not patentable but methods of achieving results can be patentable. Some claims are independent claims which means they stand alone and do not represent a narrowing of some other claim. Dependent claims refer back to a preceding claim that is then narrowed by adding more steps or more details to the ...


1

You are right! They are missing from my version too. You should contact the "office of publications" at the USPTO at www.uspto.gov. If the pages are missing from the electronic files, they were probably are missing from original official gazette paper publication. In that case, you would have to order a copy of the "file wrapper". This is a collection ...


1

No problem. In the spec. and drawings you need to tell and show everything you can think of about what it is and how it is used. The users of patented devices and people carrying out patented methods are often portrayed. People can also be mentioned in claims as long as they are not an element of the claim. If it is a method claim only actions are elements, ...


1

David, The answer to your question can vary by Examiner. Technically, anything not disclosed in the spec can be considered new matter and face a 112 rejection, but some examiners are more lenient than others. Without knowing the specifics of your disclosure and/or claim language your question is difficult to address, but if you are concerned that mixing ...


1

They can be very sensitive to anything added in the spec or drawings unless it is already presented in one place and you are also putting it somewhere else, it is a dictionary definition and if the word has more than one meaning the one you intended is already clear, it is an obvious error with an obvious fix, or it is "inherent". You might need an affidavit ...


1

First the usual caveat: I'm going to mention a few bits of law here that are almost certainly specific to the US. It almost certainly doesn't apply at all outside the US. In my opinion, your first example is almost completely meaningless, at least as far as affecting what a court is likely to decide about your patent. It's simply stating what's essentially ...


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