-
Call Us +1 (415) 730-9244
-
Email Us [email protected]
Call Us +1 (415) 730-9244
Email Us [email protected]
Prior Art is a term used by the USPTO to define similar documents and products that have a priority date of issue earlier than the filing date of the innovation seeking patent protection.
While anyone is allowed to conduct a market-based and USPTO-based Web search to evaluate the viability of their innovation, it can be complex. The real importance is in the analysis of the oftentimes, massive and overwhelming Search results. Thus, to derive the most actionable value from Search results, it is best conducted by a professional who has been trained to identify which results are most pertinent and why.
Conducting a Patent Search is often undervalued or overlooked, leading to costly dead-ends when a Patent application is later denied due to existing prior art.
A Patentability Opinion is the culmination of relevant Patent Search results identifying and describing patentable distinctions for an invention. Such an Opinion should guide innovators on whether it is in their best interest to file for Patent protection as well as support the validity of IP that has already been granted, so clients know how best to further navigate in the marketplace.
The legal answer is a simple one. An innovation must be novel and non-obvious to be patentable. However, knowing or attempting to discover the meaning of “non-obvious” can be difficult.
The following are patentable as a Utility Patent:
The ornamental design of an article of manufacture is patentable as a Design Patent.
Asexually reproduced plant varieties can be patent eligible as either a Design or Plant Patent.
Laws of nature
Literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works are not patentable, but can be Copyright protected.
Yes! The Supreme Court has upheld a two-step framework for determining the Section 101 patent-eligibility of a method or process claim, which the Court previously articulated in the 2012 Mayo decision on the patentability of a diagnostic method, as applied to computer-implemented inventions.
The Two-Part Test is:
Public Disclosure has been defined by the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) as marketing an invention or offering the invention for sale where the details of the invention are described publicly. This includes disclosing 1) the detailed description of an invention in a publicly available document (either in text or Web-based) and/or 2) the details of an invention are given in a presentation in a public forum.
Discussing the details of an invention behind closed doors with individuals who have been informed that the information is confidential AND/or who have signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement is not considered “Public Disclosure.”
When an innovation is disclosed publicly, a twelve-month timeline starts during which period you may file for Patent protection and claim a priority date of the initial public disclosure. If you do not file for Patent protection within this twelve-month period, you may lose the right to do so and your innovation may be considered freely given to the public.
A Patent affords you, the owner the right to stop others from making, using, selling or importing your patented innovation. Therefore, a Patent’s value is in the ability to 1) protect your market space by stopping competitors, 2) increase the valuation of the company, and 3) maximize revenue and stop infringement on a company’s innovation(s).
As soon as you can describe how to implement your innovation to a lay person, you have reached the “constructive reduction to practice” state. This is the time when you should file for Patent protection.
It is generally considered a good idea to file for Patent protection prior to releasing an MVP to the market. Releasing an MVP is considered public disclosure (launching a 12-month window of opportunity to file for Patent protection in the US) and such a release prior to filing a Patent application will destroy your ability to file for Patent protection in some jurisdictions (European countries).
The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) requires that a person of “ordinary skill in the art” must be able to recreate what you have disclosed simply by following your description and any associated figures.
No. Mobile applications that don’t have Patent protection have no rights under IP law
On average, the Patent process can take two to five years to prosecute to completion.
Utility Patent – 20-year term from date of earliest priority
Design Patent – 14-year term from date of earliest priority
Plant Patent – same as a Utility Patent.
The enforcement term begins from the date of Patent issuance and ends 20 or 14 years respectively, from the date the Patent application (or earliest version thereof) was initially filed.
Maintenance fees are required every 3 to 3.5 years, 7 to 7.5 years, and 11 to 11.5 years after the date of issue to keep all Utility Patents in force.
Design and Plant Patents do not require maintenance fees.
Not all worthwhile/valuable innovations are patent eligible therefore, Trade Secrets can be a valuable tool for a company to protect itself from competitors.
Remember, a Patent protects an innovation that is useful, new, and not an obvious improvement in the marketplace.
A Trade Secret, if it became publicly known, is considered to be an innovation that would be easily reproduced by a person of “ordinary skill in the art” without undue experimentation. A Trade Secret can be an obvious improvement to a device or product. Once the secret becomes publicly known, it is no longer enforceable under Trade Secret.
Once a Patent application is filed, it is placed on a Patent Examiner’s docket for examination. Be prepared (and patient); it can take months for a Patent Examiner to read your application due to heavy case loads. A Patent Examiner is responsible for reviewing the application Specification (description of invention) and Claims to determine if the claims infringe on any publicly available product, method, or apparatus. The Patent Examiner will conduct an independent world-wide prior art search to determine if anyone else has released a product or has published an innovation description that is the same as the claimed invention in your application.
If your claimed invention is found to already be publicly known or patented anywhere else in the world, the Patent Examiner must deny the Claims submitted.
The next step in the process is to respond to a Patent Examiner’s Objections and Rejections in which the inventor is permitted to amend Claims in their application to show how their invention is different than identified prior art so as to overcome an Examiner’s rejection and hopefully, proceed to patentability.
Yes, if you have filed the application on your own, as a Pro Se filer, you many check the status at any time. If you are represented by a Patent professional they can check the status at any time. Once the application has published, usually at 18 months after the date of filing, the application is readily accessible to the public.
In such a case, you as the inventor, are permitted to amend Claims in your Patent application to show how your invention is different than identified prior art so as to overcome an Examiner’s rejection and proceed to patentability.
A Notice of Allowance is a notice by a Patent Examiner that the claims you have filed are patentably distinct over all discovered prior art. The Notice of Allowance indicates that you may receive your patent by accepting the Examiner’s reasons for allowance and paying an issue fee to the USPTO.
Yes. If you have multiple innovations you should definitely capture them in one Patent application in order to permit you to later file one or more Continuations-in-Part (CIPs) to capture different innovations and maintain the priority date linked to the filing of the first or “parent” application.
When the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) identifies more than one distinct invention in the Patent Claims of an application, the inventor is required to choose which of the patentably distinct innovations they wish to restrict and pursue in the current application (thus “Restriction Election”). Other inventions may be pursued in separate Patent applications.
A Continuation-In-Part is a Patent application that has most elements in common with a parent application, but expresses new innovative material in the Claims of the CIP.
If you have a Claim set that has been judged by a Patent Examiner to have two or more innovations in a single set of Claims, the Patent Examiner will require you to select one of them for continued prosecution (Election Restriction). The remaining innovation(s) may then be captured in a Divisional Patent application that has the set of Claims that were not captured in the first application. No new innovative material may be added to the application.
The Divisional application will have the same priority date as the first (Parent) application because the existence of different innovation(s) has already been determined, which prevents a Patent Examiner from rejecting your Divisional application as being the same as the Parent application.
Patents have the attributes of personal property.
Per USPTO statute 35 U.S.C. 154(a)(1), “Ownership of a patent gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing into the United States the invention claimed in the patent.”
Further…
“Assignment,” in general, is the act of transferring to another the ownership of one’s property, i.e., the interest and rights to the property. In 37 CFR 3.1, assignment of patent rights is defined as “a transfer by a party of all or part of its right, title and interest in a patent [or] patent application….” An assignment of a patent, or patent application, is the transfer to another of a party’s entire ownership interest or a percentage of that party’s ownership interest in the patent or application. In order for an assignment to take place, the transfer to another must include the entirety of the bundle of rights that is associated with the ownership interest, i.e., all of the bundle of rights that are inherent in the right, title and interest in the patent or patent application.
Protection under the PCT must be filed within 12 months of the filing of a U.S. Patent application to maintain priority to the U.S. Patent filing.
When an Examiner has determined that a set of Claims in an application are patentable, they issue a Notice of Allowance. To accept the Notice and permit your Patent to become enforceable, the inventor must first pay an Issue Fee. Upon payment of the Issue Fee, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will publish the allowed Patent application and place it in enforceable status by “Issuing” the Patent.
Because of the lengthy patent approval process, inventors often continue to improve upon the innovation originally claimed in their Patent application. Upon allowance an inventor is given three months to pay the issue fee. During this time the patent application is still in prosecution and when an inventor has created an improved version of an allowed Patent application, payment of the Issue Fee may be delayed to the end of the three month window to give the inventor time to file the improvement to the patented innovation as a Continuation-in-Part (CIP). The CIP may use the allowed, but not yet issued, patent application as a parent as long as it remains “in prosecution”.
Yes, as “Pro Se” is Latin meaning “for himself.” Under United States law and therefore, before the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO), an Applicant can represent himself/herself/itself.
However, the success of a Pro Se depends on the legal skill of the individual and their understanding and command of the following:
Note: Patent Examiners are given more leeway in the examination of the applications from Pro Se inventors, up to and including the Patent Examiner assisting in the creation of one Claim with the Pro Se inventor.
Patents are geographically oriented and are only enforceable within the country or jurisdiction in which they are allowed. If you hold a U.S. Patent you likely cannot affect the release of a competing product in Japan or China, for example. You may only affect the release of a competing product in Japan or China if you have a Patent allowed and in force in those respective countries.
