Print

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

[JasonR]

With the exception of claims, can a preliminary patent application be as complete as a regular patent application?  Are there any other sections/aspects besides the claims that should not be included?

[Bill Richards]

Yes, and many practitioners, myself included, will write a PPA as an NPA.  There does, however, seem to be some disagreement about including claims in the PPA.  The concern is that changes to the claims when the NPA is filed may be construed as invoking Festo.  I think that's a stretch, but it's not been tested in the courts as far as I know.

[pentazole]

Hmm... interesting about not including claims in PPA's.  Since I started working in this field (not too long ago), I have written PPA's as if they were NPA's, including claims and everything.  I'm going to have to rethink it now.

[biopico]

People that I am in association with include claims in PPAs.  

[TataBox]

For foreign filing reasons it is a good idea to include a broad claim or set of claims.

Regards,

[shannu]

I have been into this field for six years and have been claiming a broad genus claim in case of a product PPA and a set of broad claims in applications such as process, combination, polymorphs etc

Regards  

[Wiscagent]

"... changes to the claims when the NPA is filed may be construed as invoking Festo.  ..."

One way to avoid this possibility is, when drafting the provisional app'n write the claims, just as you would for a regular app'n.  But only actually file the provisional app'n with a broad claim.

An advantage of this approach is that you can be sure to file the provisional app'n with support for the full set of claims.  If you do not write the full set of claims, you may have support issues when you go to file the regular app'n.

Of course this whole discussion omits the question of which is better for an applicant - to have the claim granted one year sooner, or to have the expiration date of the patent be one year later.  For most applicants, it is more important to have the patent granted sooner, and not worry if the patent would expire in 2027 or 2028.

[Isaac]

One way to avoid this possibility is, when drafting the provisional app'n write the claims, just as you would for a regular app'n.  But only actually file the provisional app'n with a broad claim.

If claims in a provisional are going to create a Festo issue, (and I'd argue that there is no such Festo implication) it will be because the claims in the provisional are broader than those filed or ultimately allowed in the later non-provisional.   I don't  understand how filing a broad provisional claim is going to prevent Festo issues.

That said, I have always filed the provisional with a broad claim and haven't given a thought to the Festo implications.   OTOH, I haven't filed a provisional in a couple of years.

[Wiscagent]

Good point Isaac.

Would a better approach be to file the provisional with one small part of the (potential) claim set?  That way, when you file the regular application you would be broadening (or adding broader) claims.

[PA]

I vaguely remember reading somewhere (maybe here) about the idea of including a single omnibus claim in a provisional.