The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jul 21st, 2019, 1:17pm

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
Inventors
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   Good Patent Firm
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2 3  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Good Patent Firm  (Read 3646 times)
sammyknows
Guest
Re: Good Patent Firm
« Reply #5 on: Aug 20th, 2007, 7:08am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

The PO works for patent professionals and attempted to advertise for them because they are new, however, it went very wrong.   I would bet my life that the PO does not provide you with an application/granted patent number.   I have not checked, but my guess is they will not come up on the USPTO website under granted or published apps.
IP Logged
TataBoxInhibitor
Full Member
***




   


Posts: 456
Re: Good Patent Firm
« Reply #6 on: Aug 20th, 2007, 9:26am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

3K, which includes USPTO fees, is a pretty decent price.  
 
 
Regards,
 
IP Logged
IP4me
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 36
Re: Good Patent Firm
« Reply #7 on: Aug 30th, 2007, 9:56pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Wow.  A lot of hating on this board.  First, I work there so let me straighten some things out about Patent Professionals LLC.  Patent Prosecutor, I don’t know who you are but thank you for the kind words.  We serve hundreds of individual inventors who are tired of paying $10K in fees for a single nonprovisional utility patent application.  Second, that price was only an introductory price for new customers who were also individual inventors.  Currently, it is about $2K higher than this price – which is still a great deal!
 
Now for the hating.  Isaac, if you don’t know why the named inventor ends up with any “added value” we put into the patent, I think you need to relearn the law about idea ownership and employer and employee relationships, as well as basic contract law.  Adding value to an application is what all patent practitioners should be doing, especially those like yourself that probably charge $10K in individuals. Otherwise, you are little more than a glorified secretary regurgitating what the inventor spits out and converting it to legalese.  I admit, we do charge corporation much more, but that is because we have the skills, credentials, and experience to do so.
 
And as for JSonnabend, I would stay clear of SonnabendLaw out of Brooklyn for the simply reason that you don’t even know when patent applications become published.  Even if Patent Prosecutor wanted to, you wouldn’t have access to his application yet.  I have not checked, but I bet both JSonnabend and sammyknows are not even registered practitioners, or if they are registered, are perfect examples of why the PTO should make practitioners re-register.  As for work samples, there are plenty on our site if you bothered to look before disrespecting a very good and well respect firm:
 
http://www.patent-professionals.com/index.php?page=experience
 
Let’s see, Hewlett-Packard, Texas Instruments, IBM, Halliburton. Wow we serve some great clients.  Let me tell you why - we know what we are doing and provide a great value for our clients.  Let’s look at JSonnabend’s clients from their website - Classy Kid, Point-X Corporation, Pancake Programming.  Wow let me tell you why you don’t have great clients - you charge too much, probably produce low quality work, and probably need to go back to law school.
 
And yes, Patent Professionals LLC does provide high quality patents at great rates.  In fact, most of our practitioners have over 5 years of experience (I only have 3) and are graduates from Stanford or Berkeley.  So JSonnabend before you start disrespecting my firm, I suggest you go back to your Tier 3 law school and ask for a refund.
 
[Tata - thank you too for the kind words.]
« Last Edit: Aug 30th, 2007, 10:00pm by IP4me » IP Logged

J. Watts
Patent Agent
Patent Professionals LLC
Affordable Patent Agents and Attorneys
PA
Guest
Re: Good Patent Firm
« Reply #8 on: Aug 31st, 2007, 12:06am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Wow, are we in grade school again?  IP4me, you would have been better off just relying on just the facts. Unfortunately, the insults just make you and your firm look worse.  
 
Whether intended or not, Patent Prosecutor comes off as a shill in his/her post.  Some of the reactions to Patent Prosecutor, while a bit harsh, don't seem out of the ordinary.  As for Isaac's question, how was that hating?  Oversensitive a bit?
IP Logged
Myth Buster
Guest
Re: Patent Firm Disseminating Misinformation
« Reply #9 on: Aug 31st, 2007, 11:45am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

I'm guessing IP4me is indeed the OP on this thread.
 
In any event, I copied the below misinformation directly from the website provided by the OP. So here is some meat for the dog pit:
 
"A provisional patent application does not in itself afford legal protection to its holder nor does it receive substantive examination by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Once filed with the USPTO, however, a provisional patent application prevents all others who conceive of the invention after the filing date of the provisional patent application from obtaining patent protection. Thus, a provisional patent application effectively locks in your filing date and excludes those who may conceive of your invention after this filing date."
 
So, IP4me, can you tell us what is wrong with the above quote?
 
Do you have any other suggestions for us regarding further education?
 
There are other message threads on this website where you can get more accurate information about provisional patent applications.
 
Myth Buster
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 3  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.3.2!
Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board