Patent and Invention Help Forum

Post reply

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Message icon:

Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What is 7 minus 2?:
Type the word:   PATENT:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Topic Summary

Posted by: BobbyB
« on: December 21, 2017, 04:12:13 PM »


That was an excellent answer - partly because it says what I hoped it would say ha ha.
Thanks for that.

After looking at your "doctrine of equivalents" Wikipedia link - I believe that the vast majority of alternative methods to replace my connectivity would easily be subject to the "triple identity" test and would answer yes to each of the statements (down below for others).  There is always that tough call on whether to consult a $400/hr attorney on everything related to patents.

Thanks for the help Brad

"Triple Identity" test applied to individual claims:
1.  Performs substantially the same function
2.  In substantially the same way
3.  To yield substantially the same result
Posted by: Brad
« on: December 21, 2017, 09:36:05 AM »

Doubtful anyone can answer this specifically here as infringement type questions are best handled by an attorney with litigation experience ($400+ per hour) but this may help:

1) I would make a "claim chart" for each element in your claims and compare that to the other device to see if it infringes:
(note that to infringe they only have to copy just one claim - not all of your claims)

2) For your spring as a connector method, you may be able to stop them under the "doctrine of equivalents" assuming you did not narrow your claims to specifically say "spring" during the back and forth with the examiner:
Posted by: BobbyB
« on: December 20, 2017, 06:15:45 PM »

Hi all - would like your thoughts on this

I was issued a utility patent in August this year and I have a Continuation in Part going through review now.

My patent is a system of objects that connect together.  The real novelty of this patent is the fact that the objects connect to each other, not the method they use to connect.

That said - I have 5 or 6 claims each with a method of connectivity of these objects.
Let's say one claim is with latches, another claim is with complimentary-shaped interlocking sleeves, another claim is with hooks and springs.

If someone was to copy my exact system and have the same novelty of the connectivity between objects but use springs for connectivity instead of one of my claimed methods - would that be considered a patent infringement?

Thank you!