Difference between revisions of "Tips for Patentability Searching617397"
(Created page with "Persons new to filing patent applications often have fundamental questions regarding patent searches. Should an inventor do a patent search? Is a patent search needed? Does it...")
Latest revision as of 16:26, 13 April 2018
Persons new to filing patent applications often have fundamental questions regarding patent searches. Should an inventor do a patent search? Is a patent search needed? Does it matter when a patent search is done? What occurs when nothing is found? What ought to be carried out when the inventor finds out that the invention is not patentable?
Patent searches are optional. There is no requirement in the U.S. that an inventor perform a patentability search prior to filing a patent application. Some rookie inventors are confused by the requirement that IF a search is done and relevant prior art is found, that relevant prior art ought to generally be disclosed to the patent examiner or the inventor may be accused of fraud. Note that nonetheless, a prior art search is not required, just passing on recognized relevant prior art, from an optional search is required.
Some inventors take the position that they do not want a search so they find out any bad news. If they discover out no bad news, there is absolutely nothing withheld from the patent workplace, as the inventor by no means had the poor news to reveal. Also, waiting for patent search outcomes and later making needed invention changes has can delay a race to the patent office. Definitely, when the U.S. Patent Office switches to a first-to-file system in March 2013, promptly filing patent applications will turn out to be much more essential.
However, the patent office does do its personal patentability searches. So at some point the inventor might find out the bad news that prior art bars obtaining a patent issued. By the time that the patent examiner conveys the bad news, the inventor has spent a considerable amount to prepare and file the patent application, waited a number of years for the first notice from the examiner, and invested funds on manufacturing and marketing the invention with an expectation of exclusivity. By the time that the inventor finds out that no patent will problem, the original patent application issues, telling the inventor's competitors how to make and use the invention. As soon as the competitor finds out that no patent will problems, then they can exploit the technologies with impunity without paying 1 dime.
Definitely, an inventor ought to think about the patentability search as similar to having a mechanic review a used vehicle prior to buy. While the mechanic will not assure that the vehicle will not break down, you will surely find out if there are any clear mechanical problems before you commit to buying the vehicle, registering it, and maintaining it throughout its lifetime. In the exact same way, an inventor should want to know if there are any clear defects in the idea of patenting an invention prior to committing to filing a patent application (registering) and paying thousands of dollars in upkeep fees to preserve the life of the issued patent.
Just like the reviewing mechanic cannot assure that the car will final forever, a patent searcher cannot guarantee that no prior art exists that could block obtaining a patent. The mechanic appears for bad news that can be found with out taking every bolt and washer apart on the vehicle. The patent searcher can look for prior art, in the searcher's native language, on computer databases all through the globe. However, the patent searcher is not most likely to be conscious of a single copy of a Swahili-language doctoral thesis sitting on a library shelf in Tajikistan. Thus, care ought to be taken to have a extremely good searcher involved with an understanding that looking should reach as far as feasible but at some point must reach a limit.
Rookie inventors sometimes do their personal patent search and claim that they found "nothing like it" concerning their invention. The reality that they are missing is that their search was not competent. Whilst there is no way to discover every single piece of prior art all through the universe, there also is no way to search adequately and not discover at least some things that are related to the invention.
Another issue for novice inventors is finding barring prior art following performing an sufficient search before filing a patent application. The fact is that a patent searcher can only discover what is publicly accessible. If a search is performed on February 1st and the patent application is filed on April 30th, the patent workplace examiner might come up with prior art that only published on February 2nd.
Unfortunately, it is rather common that a patentability search comes up with a ton of prior art such that there is now way to get a patent for the invention. The good news is that the bad news is discovered before spending time and money on preparing and filing the patent invention that would have been rejected promptly. The take home for the inventor losing out on a patent search is that the inventor now has a thorough review of the prior art, which ought to be useful to discover further aspects that can be incorporated into enhancing the invention. The inventor can now brainstorm with a focus on substantial novel elements of the invention above the prior art.