Another Invention Does Something Similar to Mine – What Should I Do?

There are other inventions that do the same thing or provide the same result as my invention, but my invention does it differently. Is my invention still patentable?

Rarely do patents protect a RESULT and the RESULT is seldom patentable for most field of inventions without also claiming the functional elements used to obtain the result (e.g., electro-mechanical inventions). Rather, patents more often protect the functional components/systems/processes that are used to obtain a desired RESULT, however common the result.

Can the functional elements that are used to achieve the result in your invention (albeit a common result) be distinguished from the elements of a previously patented invention that may be used to obtain the same result? If so, then there may be a patentable distinction between your invention and the patented invention.

The next question we should ask is whether your functional elements are a mere obvious variation of the patented invention? If not, then we move to the second stage of the analysis: is there any prior art that discloses the same/similar functional elements but for the purposes of obtaining a different result or utility in a different field of use?

If so, we may run into the legal issue of “obviousness” – would it have been “obvious to one of ordinary skill in the field of your invention” to take the functional elements from one field of use and apply it to another field of use? Or, could you argue that there was a step of ‘inventiveness’ that was required to create your system.. for instance, was it necessary to modify the elements of your invention in order to obtain the desired result in the different field of use?

TL;DR:

1. Same result, but different functional elements may be patentable IF:
2. Functional Elements have not been previously combined to obtain desired result; or

a) Functional Elements have not been previously combined in the current field of invention, and
b) Inventive modifications were necessary to obtain desired result in the current field.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

Public Disclosure – What Happens If Someone Files for a Patent Before You Do?

If an inventor disclosed his/her invention to his partners/university/employer, probably had some form of public disclosure, but did not have a provisional patent – what happens if a person with a similar invention had a provisional patent filed which could come after the first inventor’s disclosure? Which inventor gets the patent?

The inventor entitled to a patent would be the first inventor to file a patent application. This is known as the First-Inventor-to-File patent system that the US adopted in March of 2013. The only way that the earlier inventor can restore his/her patent priority to the invention in this scenario is if the earlier inventor can prove that the first-filing inventor derived the invention from the earlier inventor’s public disclosure.

If this cannot be proven, there are a couple other avenues. First, we must consider what kind of patent application that the first-filing inventor may have filed. A provisional patent is NEVER disclosed by the USPTO to the public. They are kept confidential. Provisional applications also don’t undergo patent examination. Once the first-filing inventor converts the provisional patent application to a non-provisional utility patent, then patent examination begins. At the 18-month mark of patent examination, the USPTO will (with some exceptions) publish the utility patent application for public inspection.

Now, once the application is available to the public, earlier-inventors may submit evidence to the patent examiner of prior public disclosure (also known as prior-art). This evidence would be considered by the patent examiner and may be used to prevent the first-filing inventor from obtaining any patent rights. This however, does not entitle the earlier-inventor to any rights themselves.

The best thing for the earlier inventor to do in this scenario to preserve their own rights with (for example, a provisional patent application) within 12 months of the public disclosure. Then, when the first-filing inventor’s patent application publishes, the earlier inventor may attempt to oppose the first-filers application by proving that the first-filer derived the invention from the earlier inventor’s public disclosure. Having successful opposed the first-filers application, the earlier inventor’s patent application now takes the spot for patent priority!

This process is complicated and this is why it is important to have at least a provisional patent application on file before any public disclosures are made!

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

Intellectual Property 101

Below are slides from the two-part workshop that will help you understand the basics of intellectual property protection.

 

The 2 Most Common Rejections of a Patent Application

Several months after your patent application has passed preliminary examination, the process of substantive examination will begin. During substantive patent examination, a patent examiner is assigned to review your application. The patent examiner will, among many other actions, assess your patent claims and perform a patent search based on your claims.

If the Examiner finds prior art (previous patents, applications, or publications) that is relevant to your claimed invention, he may issue one of two rejections: 1) a rejection indicating that your claimed invention is not novel in view of the prior art (this is known as a 35 USC 102 rejection); and/or 2) a rejection indicating that your claimed invention is obvious (non-inventive) in view of the prior art (this is known as a 35 USC 103 rejection).

The 102 rejection indicates that the Examiner found your entire claimed invention in a single reference. The 103 rejection indicates that the Examiner had to combine one or more references together in order to derive your claimed invention.

You should carefully review the references to ensure that the Examiner has both a proper understanding of your claimed invention, as well as a proper understanding of the cited reference. If you find room for disagreement, you may traverse (or argue) the Examiners rejections. In many instances, you are entitled to hold a telephonic interview with the Examiner. You’ll find the Examiner’s phone number on the last few pages of the rejection documents (or Office Action) sent from the Examiner.

Patent Examiner’s prefer that you fax or email them with an Agenda for the interview prior to scheduling the interview. The agenda’s do not need to be detailed, but the more detail you provide the Examiner with up-front, the better feedback you will receive from the Examiner.

It is not recommend that an applicant/inventor submit any official response to the Examiner in writing. Rather, any materials provided to the Examiner for the interview should clearly be marked “FOR INTERVIEW PURPOSES ONLY”, so that they do not get entered into the official record. The most common mistake inventors make is that they argue how their invention differs from the prior art cited against their patent claims. Instead, you should either argue how your CLAIMED invention (as described in the claims) differs from the prior art, or amend your claims so that they distinguish your invention from the prior art.

Conducting this interview is a good first step in assessing the status of your matter, but it is always recommended that you speak with a licensed patent attorney prior to proceeding with any formal response to the USPTO. Remember, anything you write in the formal response Can and Will be used to limit your patent rights! Even obvious characterizations can be construed to limit the scope of your patent rights!

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

Importing a Product to the US Market without Infringing Patent Rights

Foreign companies often ask me what their first step to bringing a product to the US market should entail on the legal end. My answer is simple: make sure that your product would not infringe the intellectual property rights of others. When it comes to marketing and branding, a trademark search may suffice. When it comes to patents, however, there is a bit more digging that needs to be done.

A US patent holder has the right to ban the import of infringing products into the US for a period of 20 years. We must first perform a US patent search and to assess the state of the market in the US. From the search, we must identify the patents that are similar to your product. It is important to determine three things before importing a product that may be patented in the US:

  1. What exactly is patented?
    • Although they may appear technical in nature, Patents are complex legal documents. Every representation made in the patent document, the file history, and the examination record serves to define the scope of patent protection to which the patent holder may be entitled. A full analysis is necessary to determine what patent rights a patent holder has.
  2. Is the patent valid?
    • Patent laws often change and patents that were granted in the past often becoming invalidated due to new patent laws. Moreover, the patent holder must properly maintain his patent rights. Failure to do so will cause his patent rights to expire. We must make sure that the patent has been properly maintained. Lastly, a state-of-the art search may be performed to determine if any prior inventions may in fact have been publically available before the patent holder obtained his patent rights. These prior inventions may invalidate the patent holder’s rights.
  3. If the patent is valid, does importing our product “infringe” or “violate” the patent holders rights?
    • We must compare your product to the patented product, line-by-line, to determine if your product overlaps the scope of protection granted to the patent holder. There is much room for interpretation, so a careful assessment is necessary.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

Patent Expiration – Should You Reapply on Your Provisional?

I have not started manufacturing and my provisional patent application has expired. Should I re-apply for a provisional patent or apply for a full utility patent?

Once a provisional patent application has expired, you may refile the same provisional application on condition that you have not publicly disclosed the subject matter of the application more than a year prior to the second filing.

Once you make a second provisional patent filing, you should then ‘convert’ your second filed provisional to a utility application within a year from your public disclosure date. Alternatively, you may file the utility application immediately (without filing a second provisional), as long as you are public disclosure date was less than a year prior.

If you are outside of the 1-year period of public disclosure, you have forfeited your patent rights to the subject matter that was publicly disclosed. See What is a public disclosure? Improvements you’ve made since the public disclosure may still be patentable, so long that the improvements haven’t also been publicly disclosed more than a year prior.

Note: Although you are permitted to file a US utility patent application within 1 year of the subject matter’s public disclosure date, most other countries in the world will not grant you patent rights if you’ve publicly disclosed the subject matter prior to a patent filing in at least one nation.

If no public disclosure has been made on the invention, you may keep refiling provisional applications upon expiration, as long as you see fit. However, when you decide to convert the provisional to a utility patent, you may only claim the patent priority date of the latest filed provisional. The earlier provisional filing dates will no longer be considered priority date eligible.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

If You Develop an App with Someone Else, Who Owns the Patent & Copyright Rights?

Jack and Jill work at ACME. Jack is the owner of ACME who partnered with Jill to help develop some software. Jack and Jill never had a formal arrangement made in writing…

For various reasons, Jack and Jill are now ready to terminate their relationship. They each want to use the software that they built while working for ACME. So, they’ve compromised – Jack can use the software as a foundation for X while Jill can use the software as a foundation for Y. They now would like to know – What is the best legal arrangement for them?

First, we must determine who actually owns the software? ACME, Jack, Jill, or Jack and Jill? Since there are no documents detailing the terms by which Jack and Jill agreed to venture into jointly building the software for ACME, we can assume that ACME does not have any ownership of the software. It is now a question of ownership between Jack and Jill. For the sake of this example, Jack and Jill have conceded that they each own the software and the question of actual ownership is not an issue.

Accordingly, Jack and Jill are joint authors of the software which, if contains no patentable subject matter, is narrowly protected under copyright law. Joint authors each get 100% ownership of the entire work product. Likewise, joint-inventors for patentable software also each have 100% ownership for the entire work product.

As Joint Authors of the software, they each have 100% rights to the entire software. So, Jack can formally terminate his relationship with ACME and keep his rights to the software. Jill may do the same. In this scenario, Jack and Jill can compete with each other using the same software without any legal claims against each other.

However, since Jack and Jill don’t wish to create more conflict, Jack Inc. and Jill Inc. may then agree to their corresponding use of the software in a royalty free (optional) cross-licensing agreement. Jack would forbear his right to use the software in Jill’s field of business, while Jill would forbear her right to use the software in Jack’s field of business.

This agreement, however, would have a loophole. For example, if the software is not patented, Jack could simply recreate the cross-licensed software using different lines of code. We must remember, copyrights on software code are ‘narrow’ forms of IP protection – it does not protect the function of the software modules or interaction between the software modules. It simply protects the lines of code used to create them.

If Jack and Jill would like to prevent each other from circumventing their licensing agreement in the aforementioned scenario, their license agreement could have a clause prohibiting the use of derivative works without subsequent derivative work cross-licensing agreements. There are many favorable reasons for creating this scenario, as Jack and Jill may continue to cross-license any future derivatives of the software for each other’s mutual benefit (if they so desire).
If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

Do I Need to Know How to Make My Idea in Order to Patent It?

I have an idea that I think is/could be patent-able based on the requirements of patent-ability, but I do not yet know exactly how to make it. For example, I want to add a certain useful feature to a shoe, but do not know the best way to add that feature because I do not work in the manufacturing of shoes.

I believe I have found a company that could develop a prototype for me, but I am worried who would own the idea if they are the one’s adding expertise and deciding the best way to add the feature.

Would a provisional patent with general language about the feature and it’s useful benefit be enough to protect this idea while working with a manufacturer to develop a prototype, or would a specific description of how the shoe with the new feature is made be necessary (which I would not know until after the prototype is developed)?

Provisional patents, in large part, are designed to help the inventor secure their patent priority date while they take their invention from a ‘concept’ to a reality. During this process, you will be interacting with many parties: investors, engineers, developers, manufacturers. All of these parties may be better funded and better equipped than you are to bring your idea to market. Having a provisional patent on file will help ensure that, if anyone is entitled to a patent on your  invention, it would be you. This protects you against potential misappropriation of your invention by the parties you engage in helping you bring your idea to market.

That being said, how much do you need to know about actually making your invention for a provisional patent? Well – at the provisional level, you should be able to describe your invention conceptually. You may not know all the tricks, but the requirement is that you describe your concept such that an engineer will be able to derive how to make your invention based on your description. So, as an example, you don’t need to know how to be a programmer to patent a software application – you just need to have an understanding of how the software application what the software application should be built to do.

As another example, you don’t need to be a shoe-maker to patent a new feature/design on a shoe. You just need to describe your concept sufficiently to enable a shoe-maker, when reading your patent description, to make your concept into a reality.

So, I would agree that filing a provisional patent application is very important – and, if you know enough about your invention to describe it to someone who has the means to build it, then you have enough information for a patent application filing.

I will also add that it’s important that you should have good agreements in place with the manufactures/engineers during your work with them in creating your invention. Even if you have a patent filing, you make sure that  these manufactures/engineers sign IP Assignment agreements. These agreements require the people you work with to transfer their IP rights to any contributions they may make to your patent-pending invention during their work for you.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

My New Invention Has Many Uses – Do I Need Multiple Patents? Part 3

You’ve decided that the best approach to protect your invention is by filing patents separately for all the different functions/uses and components. This approach, if affordable, provides numerous benefits (e.g., licensing benefits). Starting the filings out as provisional applications while the invention, as a whole, is still undergoing development or ‘proof-of-concept’ can be an affordable means to protecting the various aspects of your invention. If done properly, protections for needless public disclosures may be provided.

Do you want to keep some components a secret?

The subject matter of a provisional patent application is never disclosed to the public. This affords the inventor an opportunity to continue to improve the subject matter without sharing the disclosure to the public in its ‘patent-pending’ phase. It also prevents the subject matter from entering the public domain in case the inventor decides not to pursue a non-provisional patent on the subject matter.

Recommended Approach:

Break your idea up into components (if possible) and file them as provisional applications first. A full patent application (non-provisional) can claim priority to more than one provisional application. However, as soon as you claim priority to a provisional application, the provisional application becomes public record. If you want to keep different segments of your ideas from being disclosed, file them in separate provisional applications.

In this way, when you follow with a non-provisional, you can pick and choose which components are “ready” to become public record, and which ones can remain undisclosed protected ideas. Otherwise, if you put every aspect of your invention into a single provisional application, then the non-provisional that follows will render all of the components available to the public.

 

For the full story please visit Part 1 of this series.

 

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

My New Invention Has Many Uses – Do I Need Multiple Patents? Part 2

A single invention (for example – an automated cleaning robot) may have many different innovations (let’s call them ‘components’) making up the entire invention. Inventors often struggle to decide if separate patent application filings are necessary for each innovation. To assist you in deciding, answer the following questions.

1. Could the Components be used independently of the entire invention for a different invention?

If your innovative component can be used across many different platforms, then it is best to focus a single patent application on the component itself. In addition, a patent application on the invention as whole itself may be filed, incorporating by reference the patent application on the component.

In contrast, if your innovative cannot be used across many different platforms, then it’s best to file a patent application on the invention as a whole and detail the innovative component therein.

2. Is there novelty within the Component itself?

Of course, you would feel that your innovative component is ‘novel’ – but would it pass patent examination without the context of the invention as a whole? In order to pass patent examination, the component itself would need to be deemed by the examiner as: Useful, Novel, and Non-Obvious or Inventive.

If the component, independent of the invention as a whole, has a use on its own – it would meet the ‘useful’ requirement. If the component is the first of its kind (or an improved derivative of existing components), then it would meet the ‘novel’ requirement. If the component is more than just a combination of other existing components, then it would meet the ‘non-obvious’ and ‘inventive’ requirements.

For more information visit Part 3 of this series.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

My New Invention Has Many Uses – Do I Need Multiple Patents?

A single invention (for example – an automated robot) may have many different uses and functions. Inventors often struggle to decide if separate patent application filings are necessary for each use and function. To assist you in deciding, answer the following questions.

Does the single invention have different uses?

Generally, a patent application should only claim a single use of an invention. The first and foremost reason: If you are claiming multiple uses of the same invention in a single patent application, the Examiner, at his or her discretion, may force you to select a single use and file separate patent applications for each other use.

The second reason is related to the licensing of your patented invention. It’s important to retain flexibility when licensing your invention. You may desire to license a first use of your invention to, for example, a medical device company while licensing a second use of your invention to, for example, a software company. By having separate patent applications, each claiming a different use, you have the flexibility to control your licensing schemes rather than granting all of the uses to a single entity.

Does the single invention perform different functions?

As with the ‘use’ analysis above, a patent application should only claim a single function of an invention. The first and foremost reason: If you are claiming multiple functions for the same invention in a single patent application, the Examiner, at his or her discretion, may force you to select a single function and file separate patent applications for each other function.

The second reason is related to the licensing of your patented invention. It’s important to retain flexibility when licensing your invention. You may desire to license a first use of your invention to, for example, a medical device company while licensing a second use of your invention to, for example, a software company. By having separate patent applications, each claiming a different use, you have the flexibility to control your licensing schemes rather than granting all of the uses to a single entity.

 

For more information visit Part 2 of this series.

 

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

Can Social Media Apps Get Process Patents?

I am creating a social media app. Do I have to patent the process of what the app does? To avoid copycat versions? Or do I have to launch and create a big network effect? I am not creating any new software or technology, but the way the process puzzles together is innovating.

Processes are patentable if they are innovative! Sometimes, the process of using the app is innovative – other times, the function of the app enabled by the process is innovative. Both instances are patentable, even if the hardware/software that facilities the processes is not innovative in itself. I strongly advise against making any launch until at least a provisional patent application is filed. Here is why:

  1. First Come, First Serve: The US patent system will only award a Patent on an idea or invention to the first inventor who files a patent application. If you aren’t the first to file, you risk losing your patent rights.
  2. The Clock is Ticking: If you don’t file a U.S. Patent Application within 12 months of public disclosure (such as sharing your idea with others) or within 12 months of offering your invention for sale to the public, you lose your patent rights. Even still, the longer you wait, the greater the risk of someone else filing a patent application for the idea you came up with first.
    • Important Note: Although the US gives you a 12 month “grace” period to file a patent application after your first public disclosure, most other countries in the world do not. This means, in those countries, you will have lost your patent rights if you’ve made a public disclosure before filing the U.S. patent application.
  3. Filing a Provisional Patent Is a Great Place To Start: It’s affordable and it’s an essential take away from these 3 facts. A provisional application secures your priority date (your spot in line) to the patent rights while you develop your idea, market it, and raise funding. This helps to ensure that no one will beat you the patent office. Our platform has made the provisional patenting process quick, easy, and affordable for thousands of entrepreneurs and businesses across the nation.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

How Can I Prove I Am Patent Pending for a Provisional Patent?

In the US, provisional patent applications are kept as confidential documents, away from public availability. There is no publically accessible database in which you can search or verify provisional patent filings. This is to protect and preserve your rights while your product is still in the beta/development phase. It also allows you to let the provisional patent expire without having lost your patent rights since the subject matter of the provisional was never published.

If investors ask for proof, simply show them the records of your provisional application, which includes a filing receipt. Be sure that the disclosure is done under a Non-Disclosure Agreement. About 2-4 weeks after you file your provisional patent application, you will receive an official notice from the USPTO. You can also show this Official Notice to investors.

In the mean-time, you need to have virtual patent marking putting the public on notice that you are patent pending and, if you are selling your product, in your product packaging materials, you should reference your virtual patent marking that you should place on your website immediately. If cost is an issue, please let us know and we will give you this product at a discounted rate.

When you file your US non-provisional, you will reference your US provisional Patent Application No. to claim priority. During the filing, your attorney will submit a request for the USPTO to send a copy of the provisional patent application to the International Bureau.

pending_ltbluegold_s

 

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

,

What Is a Trademark, Service Mark, and Patent?

A trademark is what you use as a source identifier of the product or goods you offer to the public. When consumers see your products or goods, they instantly recognize your brand as the source of those goods.

A service mark is very similar to a trade mark. Except it doesn’t apply to products or goods, it applies to services. Often times, these to terms are used interchangeably.

A patent is right to exclude others from making using or selling an invention.

While a trademark/service mark protects against others using your NAME/LOGO/SLOGAN/DESIGN associated with your products or services, a patent protects others against making using or selling copies of your products or services under ANY mark.

Patent law is complicated, and every inventor’s situation is unique. SmartUp can connect you with a licensed Patent Attorney who will give you a free consultation and answer your specific questions.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri

, ,

Can I Get a Patent on My Idea?

Any person who has invented or discovered a new and useful process, machine, article of manufacture, or composition of matter may obtain a patent for it. This also includes any new or useful improvement on a past invention. Laws of nature and theories are not patentable. You do not need to have actually constructed or used your invention to get a patent on it. Having a good idea of how your invention is made and used is sufficient.

In general, the basic principles of patentability could be based on two questions:

Is the invention useful? and Is the invention new?

You may obtain a Patentability Opinion from a Patent Attorney who will determine if you’re your invention qualifies for patent based on the nature of its subject matter and its comparison to a Prior Art search.

If you are interested in more detail related to your situation it is best to speak with an attorney.

Yuri Eliezer heads the intellectual property practice group at Founders Legal. As an entrepreneur who saw the importance of early-stage patent protection, Yuri founded SmartUp®. Clients he has served include Microsoft, Cisco, Cox, AT&T, General Electric, the Georgia Institute of Technology, and Coca-Cola.

yuri