The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Jun 21st, 2018, 12:18pm

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
Patent Drafting/Interpretation
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   Method steps to be performed by a specific actor
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: Method steps to be performed by a specific actor  (Read 1926 times)
TataBoxInhibitor
Full Member
***




   


Posts: 456
Re: Method steps to be performed by a specific act
« Reply #5 on: Oct 19th, 2007, 8:50am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Sounds like if you use:
 
receiving a set of widgets
 
selecting a widget from the set of widgets received
 
 
Or something to the effect of making sure the actor is the one receiving a selecting, or performing the acts associated with the method.
 
Regards,
 
IP Logged
TataBoxInhibitor
Full Member
***




   


Posts: 456
Re: Method steps to be performed by a specific act
« Reply #6 on: Oct 19th, 2007, 8:52am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Did you say that the novelty lies in the person who is doing the acting?  If so could you give me current granted patent or publication that deals with this?  
 
 
Regards,
 
IP Logged
iploya
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 25
Re: Method steps to be performed by a specific act
« Reply #7 on: Oct 24th, 2007, 8:49am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Oct 19th, 2007, 8:52am, TataBoxInhibitor wrote:
Did you say that the novelty lies in the person who is doing the acting?  If so could you give me current granted patent or publication that deals with this?  
 
 
Regards,
 

 
Yeah, meant to clarify this point but guess I didn't.
 
Two examples come to mind:
 
1) Examiner takes an overly broad reading of a claim element/step, citing an instance where a human actor using senses and motor responses to perform the step that we intend to be performed by a machine (different actor).  By tightening the claim language a bit, you get around that particular reference, at least to that element.  Can't think of a particular instance off the top of my head, but it's happened.
 
2) A business method patent I wrote years ago at a previous firm.  It was directed to a transaction method, and at the behest of the inventor we alleged novelty in terms of who gets paid for what in the process, offering argument/support for why this was not obvious.      
 
EDIT:  Of course, I could be FOS, especially on example 2, but it's at least a position I would defend.
« Last Edit: Oct 25th, 2007, 2:23pm by iploya » IP Logged
Pages: 1 2  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