Patent and Invention Help Forum

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Brad

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48
They will only make you divide if you have multiple inventions in your claims.  It does not matter how long your application is.

So in your case one option would be to have a very large application but just try to limit your claims to only one type of invention and this should not trigger a restriction. 

1)  Why do you think you will lose your priority dates?  Usually the patent office will by default assume the priority claims are valid so you should be able to keep those.

2)  Yes your provisional applications will not publish but they will be "available" to the public through the USPTO Public PAIR system so the public could find them and view them online.

One thing you may want to do is merge all of your 3 PPAs together and you can attach that file as an "Appendix" to your full non-provisional.   This also will not publish but it will be another way to make sure all of your information from the PPAs are included with your full non-provisional.

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: Questions regarding sb0015a and sb16
« on: October 16, 2017, 08:57:34 AM »
If the "applicant" is a company than only a registered agent or attorney can sign the forms (see MPEP 4.09)

If there is no company involved than I believe you can pick one of you to be the applicant which should probably be the first named inventor and that person should sign SB16.

For the micro entity form, you would fill out the first named inventor in the top section and that would list the same person in all 3 pdfs, however, each of the 3 pdfs would have to be signed by each person.  You can then either upload all 3 pdfs as separate files or you can merge them together (does not matter).

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: Prior Art Case
« 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).

I would try to read through several patents that are related to this to get a feel for common terms used in this field.

I have used terms like "housing" and "frame" before and then you can just define those terms how you want when you write the application.   Remember, you are allowed to make up your own definitions for words so if you like the term "frame" then just define what you mean by that term in the application and show an example in the figures.

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: Prior Art Case
« 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.

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: Prior Art Case
« on: October 07, 2017, 09:12:11 AM »

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.

I would describe the attachment method generically such as "the light is removably coupled to the XXXXX"  or something like that. 

If it turns out later that the way you attach the light is crucial - you would need to update and file a new application explaining how the attachment works.

If the actual electronic components are not new/different than you will probably be okay just listing these components out as a "block diagram" in a figure where each block represents a different component of the device such as a "power source" and "light element"  a "processor"  a   "memory unit",   etc.

Many patent attorneys will "reuse" various boilerplate type sentences and paragraphs from other older patents.   I don't want to say this is okay, rather, almost every application I have written and seen has pieces and chunks from other older applications.  As far as I know nobody has ever gotten in trouble for this and in theory older patents are supposed to free and in the public domain for other people to use.

If the specific patent you are looking at has any copyright statements I would be careful and maybe not copy from that one.


I usually wait for 6 weeks and if you do not get a USPTO receipt call the application assistance phone number and give them your 62/.... number and they will tell you the status.   Phone number = 888-786-0101

For digital certificate please call:  866-217-9197

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: claiming 2
« on: September 25, 2017, 07:05:17 AM »
Please try to ask all your claim questions in the same thread and this will be the last claim question I can answer right now as I am busy this week.

I would instead write this as:

A device configured to rotate an axis.

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: claiming
« on: September 25, 2017, 07:03:44 AM »
I usually use the comma so I would do choice (1).   There should be no difference in their meaning.

Patent Questions and Advice / Re: patent claims
« on: September 22, 2017, 06:24:43 AM »
If claims 2-20 all reference and refer to claim 1 they would be considered "dependent" claims. 

Either with or without the comma should be fine.  However, I would suggest:

In the present invention, In preferred embodiments, the term “dynamic wiggling motion” of an icon refers to a wiggling motion of an icon, wherein the wiggling motion changes the shape of the icon

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 48