Spotting Inventors You Might Want to Avoid
To paraphrase the famous quote of Ralph Waldo Emerson, if you build a better mouse-trap the world will make a beaten path to your door. Inventors and entrepreneurs frequently take this quote all too literally, thinking that if they make a better product theirs will sell and make them rich beyond their wildest dreams.
There are, of course, many different reasons why building a better mouse-trap is only the first of many steps on the road to financial freedom. There is no guarantee of financial success given by any patent office in the world. This is true even if you have a strong patent that covers a great product that enjoys robust consumer demand.
But this won’t stop many inventors from attempting to patent some rather peculiar inventions. Chances are that the more peculiar the invention, the more likely the inventor is going to want the patent attorney or patent agent to work for free, or on some kind of contingency basis. If an inventor like this approaches you, even if they seem normal, do yourself a favor and just say NO!
Invention to Patent: The Pitfalls, Perils and Process
The following was written by Gene Quinn, of IPWatchdog and Practice Center Contributor.
So you have an idea and want to get a patent? There are a number of things that you need to know about the invention and patent process that can help you focus your efforts and know what obstacles lay in front of you.
The first thing to know is that you cannot patent an idea. Many people will have great ideas, but will not be able to put that idea into a package appropriate for a patent because there is no invention, only a concept. To be sure, the idea is the all critical first step in the invention process. After you come up with the idea or concept you now need to put together a game plan on how to carry that idea through. The idea and game plan together form what the law calls conception. Conception is an important concept in patent law because in the United States it is the first person to invent that CAN ultimately receive the exclusive rights on an invention. (more…)
12.30.10 | inventions, Patent Applications, posts | Stefanie Levine
Goeddel V. Sugano: What’s The Difference Between “Envisioning” An Invention And Being “In Possession” Of The Invention?
The following post was written by Gerald M. Murphy, partner at Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP and Practice Center Contributor.
In Goeddel v. Sugano, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has provided more guidance as to what is necessary for a sufficient “written description” of an invention, this time for a true “biotech” invention, in the context of a motion for benefit of priority in an interference. This case involved two interferences; one directed to DNA encoding human fibroblast interferon (hFIF) unaccompanied by a hFIF presequence (mature hFIF) and one directed to a composition comprising non-glycosylated hFIF. Sugano filed a motion for benefit of its Japanese priority application (Sugano priority application) and was granted priority by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) in both interferences. Goeddel appealed that decision on the grounds that the Sugano priority application did not constitute a constructive reduction to practice because it did not enable the Counts and did not provide a sufficient written description of the Counts. The Federal Circuit reversed on the ground that the Sugano priority application did not provide a sufficient written description of the Count because the inventors were not “in possession” of the invention. (more…)
Patent Claim Writing: Insight Into The Drafting Process
Last week, I attended PLI’s Fundamentals of Patent Prosecution 2010 Program: A Boot Camp for Claim Drafting and Amendment Writing in New York City. I was fortunate to hear an elite panel of experienced patent prosecutors talk about critical patent application topics.
Amongst the group, was Robert Faber, partner at Ostrolenk Faber LLP and one of our Practice Center Contributors. He spoke about claim drafting and gave some valuable tips as to how to write a well written claim. Faber said, ” you want to protect the invention in a claim such that you cover the concept the inventor has in mind and no matter how the particular concept is executed in years to come.” Faber advises that you should always describe the concept as broad as possible.
Below is an article Faber passed along, “Patent Claim Writing“, that helps us understand the basics of claim drafting, using a simple example:
United States Patents serve the important national goal of encouraging developments in the useful arts and sciences by granting inventors and their assignees patents that afford a limited time monopoly in their inventions in exchange for their disclosing the invention and how to practice it to the public. In the patent document, patent practitioners and patent owners= attorneys try to adequately disclose the invention and at least the best mode of practicing the invention sufficiently to enable persons skilled in the art to themselves practice the invention without undue experimentation. 35 U.S.C. ‘ 112, para. 1. That is the minimal disclosure that must be provided. (more…)
No Comments
07.6.12 | inventions | Kara OBrien