The Intellectual Property Law Server

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Oct 21st, 2019, 5:50am

Forums Forums Help Help Search Search Members Members Calendar Calendar Login Login Register Register
   Intellectual Property Forums
  
  
Is it Patentable?
(Moderators: Forum Admin, JimIvey, JSonnabend)
   One year rule and Patentability
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6  Reply Reply Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: One year rule and Patentability  (Read 2650 times)
wallflower
Junior Member
**




   


Posts: 96
Re: One year rule and Patentability
« Reply #15 on: Sep 20th, 2006, 2:16pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Sep 20th, 2006, 1:59pm, john2006 wrote:
Again, whether or not a device is patentable has nothing to do with the "claims" of prior art patent references, only what is disclosed in the descriptions and drawings of the patent(s), along with all other prior art refernces. Patentability has nothing to do with how the claims of prior art patents are crafted or written.

You gave the conditional statement: "The improvements are covered by the claims of the original patent...."  If that statement is true, no one will be able to patent those improvements.
IP Logged
john2006
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 11
Re: One year rule and Patentability
« Reply #16 on: Sep 20th, 2006, 5:20pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Wallflower wrote
 
"You gave the conditional statement: "The improvements are covered by the claims of the original patent...."  If that statement is true, no one will be able to patent those improvements".
 
My reply
 
That is simply not true Wallflower. You can have a valid patent that discloses a device that would infringe the claims of an earlier patent that has more broad claims.
 
Why would you think that it is not possible to patent a device that would infringe the claims of an earlier patent ? It has happened before and that is why people do infringement searches as well as patentability searches.
 
It is possible for an inventor to patent a device, and not even be able to use his or her own invention, if the device is covered by the more broad claims of an earlier patent.    
 
Sincerely,
John
IP Logged
wallflower
Junior Member
**




   


Posts: 96
Re: One year rule and Patentability
« Reply #17 on: Sep 20th, 2006, 5:32pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Sep 20th, 2006, 5:20pm, john2006 wrote:
That is simply not true Wallflower. You can have a valid patent that discloses a device that would infringe the claims of an earlier patent that has more broad claims.

I believe what I said is true.  You said the "improvements are covered by the claims of the original patent."  That's very different from saying, "improvements of an invention covered by the claims of a patent."  It seems like you're referring to the latter.
IP Logged
john2006
Newbie
*




   


Posts: 11
Re: One year rule and Patentability
« Reply #18 on: Sep 20th, 2006, 6:10pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Hi everyone,
 
Wallflower wrote
 
"I believe what I said is true.  You said the "improvements are covered by the claims of the original patent."  That's very different from saying, "improvements of an invention covered by the claims of a patent."  It seems like you're referring to the latter".
 
My reply
 
When I said the improvements would be covered by the claims of the original patent, I simply meant that if someone other than the inventor of the device disclosed in the original patent were to implement the new improvements, they would infringe the original patent.
 
Here is exactly what I said
 
"Let's say you have a patent with about 9 years left on it, and you find a non-obvious way to improve your product. The improvements are covered by the claims of the original patent, but you want to patent the new improvements so you can monopolize them for a period longer than 9 years".  
 
I thought it was clear that I was referring to the improvements of the "product" since I used that term in the previous sentence.  
 
I am not sure I understand why my statement is unclear.  
 
To clarify, you have a product protected by a  patent (say patent # 1), you make non-obvious and non-equivalent improvements to the product that would be protected by the claims of Patent #1, but you would like to get another patent (patent # 2) on the non-obvious and non-equivalent improvements, in order to extend the time limit of the protection (for the improvements only).
 
You seem to be saying that it would not be possible to obtain the second patent, and that is simply not true.
 
The second patent would only cover the improvements, but if the first patent will expire in 9 years, then the second patent takes over after that, to provide protection for the improvements, & only the improvements.
 
Sincerely,
John
IP Logged
wallflower
Junior Member
**




   


Posts: 96
Re: One year rule and Patentability
« Reply #19 on: Sep 20th, 2006, 6:42pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Sep 20th, 2006, 6:10pm, john2006 wrote:
I am not sure I understand why my statement is unclear.

John, you don't see the difference between saying the "improvements are covered by the claims of the original patent" and  "improvements of an invention covered by the claims of the patent"?  From your last response, it is clear that the latter is what you meant.
 
Quote:
You seem to be saying that it would not be possible to obtain the second patent, and that is simply not true.

I never said that.  Novel and nonobvious improvements of existing inventions are patentable.
« Last Edit: Sep 20th, 2006, 6:45pm by wallflower » IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6  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