Patent and Invention Help Forum

Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

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

Message icon:


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

Topic Summary

Posted by: Brad
« on: December 03, 2018, 02:06:18 PM »

Hi James,

I will leave this post open to see if anyone else wants to answer it.   

This is getting a bit too specific and detailed for me to feel comfortable answering and we would usually charge for our time to review and respond to something this case-specific. 

Posted by: newpatenter
« on: December 03, 2018, 12:12:32 PM »

There is a system/equipment consists of A, B, C, D components. Each component is also a complicated combination of fundamental industrial parts on the market.

We have a patent on A with allowance in US, refer it as A2. But we have a better A2 now, refer it as A2a, and also have a better C, refer it as C2. We would like to have a PCT if possible. 

Based on suggestions from experts here, we may need to make the following claims:
1. Component A2a;
2. Component C2;
3. System A2a, B, C, D;
4. System A, B, C2, D;
5. System. A2a, B, C2, D;

Now we may have the following path options:

Option One:
  • CIP or Continuation for #1 above.
  • Apply patent/PCT for #2, #3, #4, #5 as one patent;

Option Two:
  • CIP or Continuation for #1 above.
  • Patent/PCT for #2 in one patent;
  • Patent/PCT for #3, #4, #5 as one patent in another application.

Option Three:
  • CIP for #1, #2, #3, #4, #5 above.

Are all of these options valid paths? which one is the easiest path? Any better suggestions?

Menu Editor Pro 1.0.2 | Copyright 2014, Matthew Kerle