Patent and Invention Help Forum

Patent and Inventing Discussion => Patent Questions and Advice => Topic started by: Salil on October 06, 2017, 09:39:05 PM

Title: Prior Art Case
Post by: Salil on October 06, 2017, 09:39:05 PM
Hey there!  It would be really helpful if you could help me up with this small doubt i am having.
US20060043785A1 This is an application disclosing an invention that would be clear by reading the claims.
EP2327565B1 - This is a patent that has been granted having the same thing. I have read that for patent to be granted there should be some novelty that should have some industrial utility, that's what an utility patent is. Please go through both of the above publications and clarify that why the above patent was granted.
I know the claims are different but the novelty is not there in the invention
Further question - If I alter the values written in the claims of above EP2327565B1 patent, Will I get a patent for claiming different range while the basic invention remains the same?
Title: Re: Prior Art Case
Post by: Brad on October 07, 2017, 09:12:11 AM
Hi,

Sorry but I don't have time to read though each of those patents for you and give you comments.  (We charge $690 for a patentability opinion as it takes a good amount of time).    In general, if the claims are different and claim different features not shown in the other patent then the later patent should be allowed.

If you are making a new and non-obvious changes to the other inventions and your changes are not shown in those other patents there is a good chance you should be able to get your own patent allowed.

Hope that helps.


Title: Re: Prior Art Case
Post by: Salil on October 08, 2017, 08:52:25 PM
Thanks for giving your time to go through my post.
The doubt still remains in my mind. Please take it like this : Suppose there exists a patent that claims "a shirt of any color". Then someone invented buttons and patented his invention claiming "a shirt of any color with buttons". A third person then applies for a patent claiming " a shirt of any color with buttons,each having diameter between 1-5 cm and thickness between 2-4 mm" Would he be granted a patent for the above? Here the novelty, that are the buttons, is same but he has specifically mentioned the dimensions which according to him can be beneficial.
If yes, then if I again alter the dimensions, would I also get a patent for that?

Thanks in Advance!!

Hi,

Sorry but I don't have time to read though each of those patents for you and give you comments.  (We charge $690 for a patentability opinion as it takes a good amount of time).    In general, if the claims are different and claim different features not shown in the other patent then the later patent should be allowed.

If you are making a new and non-obvious changes to the other inventions and your changes are not shown in those other patents there is a good chance you should be able to get your own patent allowed.

Hope that helps.
Title: Re: Prior Art Case
Post by: Brad on October 09, 2017, 06:47:26 AM
In your example the 3rd person would likely not get the patent approved.   

Changing sizes and dimensions is usually not enough to get your patent allowed.

Title: Re: Prior Art Case
Post by: Salil on October 10, 2017, 01:43:12 AM
Thanks a lot, Brad!
But as stated above, EP2327565B1 was granted, despite of the fact that the innovation it claimed was already been published in US20060043785A1. I am not applying for a patent of anything else. I did my internship at a patent consultancy firm, so just out of curiosity, I am trying to understand clearly the patent laws and what is patent-able. So kindly if anyone can clear the above doubt I am having.
The examination report of the application EP2327565A1 also includes US20060043785A1 marked as highly relevant. Then the inventor added the values/dimensions in the claims of EP2327565A1 and patent was granted after this addition though the novelty is clearly disclosed in US20060043785A1. The invention is a simple one and can be easily understood by reading the claims alone. Please if you have some time go through it.
Title: Re: Prior Art Case
Post by: Brad on October 10, 2017, 07:50:50 AM
European rules are different from US so only a European Patent attorney can answer your question about the EP patent and why it was granted.     Just looking at claim #1 from the EP patent I don't see anything about sizes or dimensions so they must be claiming a feature or component in the EP patent which was not shown by the US patent, either that or the examiner just did a really bad job and allowed a patent on something that was already known (which does happen from time to time).