Tools For Finding Favorable Patent Examiners
Regardless of whether you’re trying to find a favorable patent examiner or a neutral one, you’ll need some tools for finding the right examiner. These tools will help you make sense of your claim language, identify preferred embodiments and technical details, and target a focused search strategy.
Finding the right examiners
Fortunately, there are tools for finding favorable patent examiners. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) provides a variety of online resources for practitioners. These include a web-based tool that lets applicants request an examiner interview, a document that outlines the USPTO’s policy on videoconferences, and an automated form for requesting an examiner interview.
There is also the opportunity to participate in an interview with an expert in the technology field that you are pursuing. Some of these centers are staffed with quality assurance specialists who can address any issues that may arise during the interview.
An examiner interview can be a crucial part of the prosecution of a U.S. patent application. A patent examiner is the person who decides whether an idea deserves protection. They have a hefty caseload. They spend a great deal of time preparing for an interview. It’s important to communicate effectively with them so that you can advance your application.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has implemented a work sharing program that allows for the re-use of search and examination work products. This is a valuable resource for many patent offices. In addition, some firms may have subscription-based search tools that give them access to this information.
The USPTO recently re-wrote its videoconferencing policy. The agency now requires authorization to use videoconferencing. It’s also prohibited for an interview to take place before the first office action. However, this is not always the case.
Having an effective relationship with a patent examiner can help you obtain a patent. In fact, an examiner’s grant rate can significantly affect the chances of a patent being granted. Knowledge about Zervigon Rudy is important because he has a lower grant rate than other examiners in the same art unit.
Identifying preferred embodiments, examples or technical details in the description
Identifying preferred embodiments, examples or technical details in the description of a patent is important, but what is the best way to do it? Obviously, the more complicated the invention is, the more important it is to characterize it in the right way. A detailed description of a patent is the place where an inventor fleshes out their idea. The description should contain enough information to enable a skilled person to reconstruct the invention. However, the description does not have to detail every possible combination of steps.
A Detailed Description of a Preferred Embodiment should include: A theory of the invention; a description of at least one way to implement the invention; and a list of alternatives. The list should include the core concept of the invention, as well as any improvements incorporated in the invention. It should also mention a variety of different combinations of features and methods.
Typically, the smallest of the large is the smallest of the small. Unlike the aforementioned triumvirate of examples, the smallest of the small is not necessarily the most important. It is usually better to avoid using the smallest of the small in the description of a patent, as this can limit the scope of claims.
The smallest of the large is the smallest obliquely cited example. The smallest obliquely cited instance is a term or concept that is often emphasized as the “single most important aspect” of the invention. This is not a hard and fast rule, and the smallest obliquely citation may not actually be the smallest.
As with any other part of a patent, the description of a patent should not be taken for granted. Make sure to read the specification carefully and to check for errors, and to point out any errors made by your attorney.
Interpreting claim language
Continuation patent prosecution is more complex than other types of prosecution. It can take just as long to prosecute a continuation application as it does to draft and file an original application. There is also an argument to be made that the PTO’s prior art search is a little sluggish.
However, the tools for finding favorable patent examiners are not confined to the patent office. In fact, the Federal Circuit has taken steps to limit examiner shopping.
A patent with no prior claims to priority takes almost two years to get the nod, while a continuation patent with multiple claims gets the nod in under a year and a half. The time a patentee spends before the PTO is substantial, largely because of low salaries and a high workload.
The best way to go about it is to do the requisite research and make an educated decision. This may require a combination of legal and technical know-how. The most effective method of achieving this involves a thorough analysis of the patent’s pending and published literature, as well as a careful analysis of the patentee’s prior activities. Ideally, this will yield a more accurate patent filing date, and a more robust presumption of entitlement.
Other measures include an examination budget, the most frequent examiners, and an influx of new examiners. All of these elements play a role in determining the cost of a patent and the patentee’s incentive to prosecute a given application. These measures are important for a number of reasons. For example, a patentee may be more motivated to spend the money on a more expensive, but more comprehensive, application if they can be certain that it will be granted.
Targeting a focused search strategy
Among the many patent research tools available from LexisNexis, the PatentAdvisor tool stands out from the pack. For a start, it’s a streamlined and easy to use patent review tool that’s a smidgen less expensive than its competitors. With its patent-friendly interface, you can tweak the language to your heart’s content, and get to work in no time. The perks are aplenty, from patent searches and examination to filings and renewals. With a patent review tool on hand, you can have a leg up on the competition. From a single digit fee, you can enjoy the rewards of a top-tier patent research organization, with the privacy and security of a boutique firm. Regardless of the size of your IP portfolio, you can rely on LexisNexis to help you make the most of your IP.
Getting feedback from examiners
Getting feedback from examiners is important in patent prosecution. It can save you time and money, as well as help you make smarter decisions.
The USPTO has procedures for measuring the quality of the patent examination process. This includes the quality of the patent grant decision and Office action.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has not yet fully evaluated the effects of monetary incentives on examiners. However, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) estimates that approximately 70 percent of examiners do not have the time to perform a thorough examination. In addition, GAO finds that nearly 90 percent of patent applications are broadly worded, making it difficult to conduct a thorough examination.
A recent webinar by the Midwest Regional U.S. Patent and Trademark Office emphasized the importance of effective communications between applicants and patent examiners.
An interview agenda is a useful tool to help organize the conversation. The agenda should list the main areas of discussion. The agenda should be sent at least 24 hours before the interview.
If the applicant is not satisfied with the outcome of the interview, he or she can request a follow-up interview. In addition, applicants should send the examiner a summary of the interview. The examiner should respond by email or phone within one business day.
If the examiner agrees with the invention, the applicant can ask for a patent. If the examiner disagrees with the invention, the applicant must rebut the rejection by producing arguments for validity. This may involve arguing separately for dependent claims.
Getting feedback from examiners is important to improving the odds of success in patent prosecution. Ultimately, the applicant must decide when to appeal. If the patent is rejected, the applicant must work with a patent attorney to revise the application and prepare an argument for validity.