|
|
Author |
Topic: Proverbial "better mousetrap" - infringe (Read 1518 times) |
|
Steve Metcalf
Guest
|
 |
Proverbial "better mousetrap" - infringe
« on: Dec 17th, 2007, 12:17pm » |
 Quote  Modify
 Remove
|
Folks,
I am planning to develop a product that will directly compete with another product currently on the market and with a "patent pending". I have read thru the pending patent (filed 3/2005) but cannot determine if an actual patent was filed.
The pending patent seems to describe a type of product that's already manufactured and has been available for many years... this product just takes the same "principles" and just redesigns it a bit.
I'd like to move forward with my product due to the fact that the manufacturer of the "pending patented" product is very expensive and I'm positive I can produce a similar product for significantly less.
From what I've researched, if I develop this product independently, I should be in the clear but the cynic in me is saying it can't be that easy. Any guidance that can be provided would be greatly appreciated.
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
Steve Metcalf (guest)
Guest
|
|
Re: Proverbial "better mousetrap" - infr
« Reply #1 on: Dec 17th, 2007, 1:36pm » |
Quote Modify
Remove
|
after more research i found the "Written Opinion of the International Search Authority (WOSA)" for this particular patent application in question.
most of the claims in the "pending patent" were found to either "lack novelty" or "lack an inventive step". are these things "all or nothing" deals? will the PTO not issue the patent if some of the claims (not sure of the terminology) aren't novel or inventive?
this WOSA was just published late Nov of this year. does this normally result in the patent NOT being issued? i've seen various similar devices to the one for which a patent was applied so it makes sense that these guys wouldn't be issued a patent but this is def not my area of expertise (thus my posting here)...
thoughts?
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Wiscagent
Full Member
Posts: 843
|
|
Re: Proverbial "better mousetrap" - infr
« Reply #2 on: Dec 17th, 2007, 1:59pm » |
Quote Modify
|
The purpose of the WOSA is to inform the applicant and patent examiners (in whichever countries national stage applications are filed) of relevant prior art. If and when national stage applications are examined, the examiner may find other prior art and/or may find other problems with the application; also the applicant will have an opportunity to amend the claims and/or rebut the examiners’ actions. So while the WOSA may give you some general idea of the patentability, it should not be considered definitive.
|
|
IP Logged |
Richard Tanzer
Patent Agent
|
|
|
CriterionD
Full Member
 
Posts: 202
|
|
Re: Proverbial "better mousetrap" - infr
« Reply #3 on: Dec 17th, 2007, 4:02pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Just to add, its also possible that the PTO will allow some claims but not others. If some of the claims are deemed to not be novel or "non-obvious," the USPTO will not allow those claims as they currently stand. It does not necessarily mean that the patent won't be granted.
|
|
IP Logged |
www.criteriondynamics.com
|
|
|
|
|
Forums
Help
Search
Members
Calendar
Login
Register
Reply
Send Topic
Print