Inventors typically come to us with an idea of what they think is new about their invention. Usually, they have not done a prior art search, and as a result, are sometimes overly optimistic about the breadth of a patent they might ultimately
Read More
On more than one occasion we have heard a client express surprise or frustration that the Patent Office issued one of their competitors a patent which seems invalid because it claims something known in the “prior art” or has some overly broad
Read More
It is sometimes the case that the real driver of value in a patented machine or system is in the aftermarket for replaceable components. The problem is that, on their own, the replaceable components often lack any unique functionality and are unprotectable with
Read More
With the incredible advances in computing technology over the last 20 years has come a vast array of inventions that are implemented in some form of software. Smartphone apps, TV apps, manufacturing processes, facial recognition technology, artificial intelligence program, the list of
Read More
Sometimes the best defense is a good offense. Clients often assume that they are entitled to a patent because no single piece of prior art shows all of their invention. In that case the invention may be novel. However, it does not
Read More
Pros and Cons of Apparatus and Method of Use Claims Devices or apparatuses can often be protected by using two kinds of patent claims: apparatus and method of use claims. Each approach has its benefits and drawbacks. In general, apparatus claims expand
Read More
Well, we thought so, but now we are not so sure. It seems that the much more is required than the business method itself in order to obtain a patent. The cases suggest that, at a minimum, novel computing features are required.
Read More
Clients often want to know how long it will take them to get a patent. Of course, whether they get one at all will depend on whether their invention is novel and non-obvious as well as how broadly their claims are drafted.
Read More