A common question I get from the start-up community here in Austin is “Can I patent software for my mobile application and software?” Currently the United States is a jurisdiction that allows for software to be patented while other jurisdictions, such as Japan do not allow software to be patented.… Read the rest >>
Below is a list of the top 10 patent law firms in the US based on issued patents over the following years: 2011, 2012, 2013.
I am pleased to see that my former firm, Harness, Dickey, and Pierce is still listed as a top 5 law firm even after my departure.… Read the rest >>
WHAT IS AN OFFICE ACTION?
An “office action” is an official letter from the United States Patent and Trademark Office representing a patent examiner’s review of the status of a pending patent action. Typically, an office action indicated that none, some, or all of the pending claims are allowable, and the patent examiner’s concerns regarding the claims.… Read the rest >>
During patent prosecution it is likely that a patent examiner at the USPTO will issue an office action with a 35 USC 102 and or 35 USC 103 rejections. Samples for responding to a 35 USC 102 rejection can be found here and 35 USC 103 rejection here.… Read the rest >>
Initially please review an overview of design patents (overview of design patents) and provisional patents (overview of provisional patents).
To determine whether to file a design patent or a provisional/utility patent application it is helpful to understand what your invention is directed towards.… Read the rest >>
A common question I receive from inventors and decision makers at Start-ups is whether they should file a provisional patent application or a non-provisional patent application for their new invention. There are benefits and detriments to both ways of beginning the patent process for an invention, which in some industries may be more important.… Read the rest >>
Examiner interviews are good ways that an application (a patent attorney and/or inventor) can discuss an office action and the related art with the issuing Examiner. Typically, Examiners will issue office actions with 35 USC 102 or 35 USC 103 with art they use to meet each and every element of your claims.… Read the rest >>
Linked is a sample response to Office Actions from the USPTO PatentAttorneyTemplateResponsetoOfficeActions
Examiners commonly reject claims as being obvious as 35 USC 103 in view of a combination of prior art. 35 USC 103(a) states:
(a) A patent may not be obtained though the invention is not identically disclosed or described as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which said subject matter pertains.… Read the rest >>
Restriction requirements occur when a patent examiner at the USPTO deems that an inventor has included more than one invention in a patent application. With the recent increase in filing fees, there may be a strong desire to include patent claims directed to a plurality of related, but separate inventions into one patent application.… Read the rest >>
Double patenting seeks to prevent an unjustified extension of time beyond the term of a patent. Therefore, if an applicant files patent application 1 on date A and files a similar patent application 2 on date B, the second invention may be considered a double patent, and the right to exclude others of the patented technology should not be extending based on the later patent filing.… Read the rest >>