iploya
Newbie
Posts: 25
|
 |
Re: Method steps to be performed by a specific act
« Reply #7 on: Oct 24th, 2007, 8:49am » |
 Quote  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 |
|
|
|
Forums
Help
Search
Members
Calendar
Login
Register
Reply
Send Topic
Print
Author