Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LaplacesDemon]

NOLO's book "How To Make Patent Drawings" says

Chemical formulas, mathematical formulas, and tables are substantially textual information, so they may either be submitted as drawings or incorporated in the description.

My tables exceed the size limit for incorporation in the description. If I include my tables as drawings do I have to include them in the "Brief Description of the... Drawings" and "Detailed Description of the Invention" sections even though the exact same information could, if smaller, be presented in the specification without such descriptions in those sections? The use of the tables is, of course, fully described in "Operation of the Invention".

Thanks!

[klaviernista]

First: the drawings are part of the description.

Second:  a brief description of any drawing, including a table, must be provided in the "Brief Description of the Drawings" section.  A simple statement about the table should be sufficient.

Third:  How long are the tables you need to include?  Depending on the size, you may want to submit them on a CD.

Best,

Klav

[LaplacesDemon]

Thank you for your reply klav! 

I've got 5 tables spread across two sheets of paper. Mostly they are examples of the type of data that would be used in conjunction with the invention. I'm not trying to include every possible configuration. Just explain the kind of material that would be provided for the process to be performed.

I can limit the "Brief Description" easily enough. I was just hoping not to have to get too much into "The first column of Table 01 is blah blah blah..." in the "Detailed Explanation" area because the table already says what column one is for. That's why its there.

Sometimes I think, "Go ahead and send it and if they don't like it they'll tell me to change it."

Anyone else just do that?

[klaviernista]

Five tables spread across two pages is not too large for incorporation into the specification (as distinct from the drawings), IMO.  I've seen specs that contain tables identifying hundreds of distinct species of compounds in the specification. Some of those tables spanned 40-50 pages of the printed patent. 

The brief description of a drawing can be extremely general.  You might want to explain in detail what the data means at some other point in the specification, particularly if it is critical to satisfying the enablement, written description, or best mode requirements.   

There are times when I am not sure what the PTO wants, or whether it will accept a particular modification.  In those instances, I'll file the response/change as is if I feel that I have a good faith basis for believing that the action I am taking is correct.  You are correct that the PTO will often tell you to change something about an application if it isn;t up to snuff.  But there is no guarantee that they PTO will do so.  If you make a critical error that the PTO doesn't catch, the responsibility falls on you.