![]() ![]() I hear all the time that inventors don’t want to describe things specifically because they don’t want to be locked in and want very broad protection. You do not only want to describe the specific, but not describing the specific is an enormous mistake. ![]() It is important, in fact critical, for inventors and those new to drafting patent application understand that it is essential that the invention be described with as much detail and specificity as possible. The key is to understand that anything included at the time you file a patent application makes up the totality of the disclosure, and the reality is that patent drawings are worth at least 1,000 words - likely much more! Thus, there is a disconnect between what is “required” by law and what should be provided. That being the case it would be wise for applicants to provide illustrations even when a method is being claimed. Still, virtually every method or process can be depicted in one way, shape or form by illustration. ![]() The only time patent drawings are not required is when the invention relates to a chemical compound or composition is being claimed, or if there is just a method or process being claimed. ![]() Based on my experience I can say that patent drawings are almost always required, and the easiest best way to create a better, strong application is to include many patent drawings. Said another way, whenever a drawing would assist in the understanding of an invention you need at least one patent drawing. The patent laws require that a patent applicant to furnish at least one patent drawing (sometimes referred to as a patent illustration) of the invention whenever the invention is capable of illustration by way of a drawing. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |