Patent law, popcorn dispenser and anticipated patents

Anticipated Patent Claims – 35 U.S.C. 102

When Your Patent is “Anticipated by a Prior Reference”

The Patent Examiner argues that one or more claims of my Patent Application are anticipated by a prior reference. What does this mean?

In short, it means that the Examiner argues that someone else invented your invention before you did.

Let’s expand on that:

35 United States Code (U.S.C.) 102, in part reads: “A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication…before the effective filing of the claimed invention…” 35 U.S.C. §102 requires that the prior reference must have existed before your Patent Application was filed. When the Patent Application’s claim is rejected under 35 U.S.C. §102, the Examiner argues that the rejected claim is “anticipated.”

When a Patent Examiner argues that one or more of your Patent Application’s claims defining your invention are anticipated, the Examiner is saying that a single prior reference discloses all of the structures of your invention.

The Patent Appellate court[i] has held, “For a prior art reference to anticipate in terms of 35 U.S.C. §102, every element [structure] of the claimed invention must be identically shown in a single reference…These elements [structures] must be arranged as in the claim under review.”

How Can I Counter the Rejection?

One way to counter the Patent Examiner’s anticipation rejection is to amend the claim.

Therefore, you can amend the anticipated claim by deleting structure or adding structure to your invention. Additionally, you should add the changes to the wording of the Patent Application’s claims. For instance, if the alleged anticipated claim required a piece of furniture with four legs, you could exclude one of the legs from the claim to create a table with three legs. Similarly, you could add a back support to the claim to create a chair.

In addition, you can argue that the Examiner’s prior reference fails disclose every structure of your invention as claimed in the Patent Application.

How Similar in Structure and Use Does the Anticipated Claim Have to Be?

For instance, can the Patent Examiner use a prior reference that is unrelated to my invention’s use to successfully argue that my claim is anticipated? Can you give me an example?

Sure! Let’s take the question “Can an Oil Can’s Nozzle Anticipate a Popcorn Dispenser?” which was the basis of an actual case!

Yes. An oil can’s nozzle does anticipate a popcorn dispenser. Here’s how it was argued:

In the case of In Re Schreiber, 128 F. 3d 1473 (Fed. Cir. 1997), the Patent Examiner argued that Swiss Patent No. 172,689-Harz  disclosed a “spout for nozzle-ready canisters” that anticipated Schreiber’s claim for a popcorn dispenser.

On Page 1447 of Schreiber, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wrote:

    • Schreiber argues…that Harz [Swiss Patent No. 172,689] does not disclose that such a structure can be used to dispense popcorn from an open-ended popcorn container.
    • Although Schreiber is correct that Harz does not address the use of the disclosed structure to dispense popcorn, the absence of a disclosure relating to function does not defeat anticipation.
    • It is well settled that the recitation of a new intended use for an old product does not make a claim to that old product patentable.

In conclusion, according to Schreiber, the function of the invention is irrelevant to the Patent Application’s claims in the United States. So an existing patent on an oil can did, in fact, prevent the patent of a popcorn dispenser with a similar shape, despite the completely different function.

Patent Law Can Be Confusing

If you need legal assistance with responding to a USPTO Office Action, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLCBusiness Patent Law, PLLC provides intellectual property and business counsel for businesses and companies.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your business and intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

[i] In Re Bond, 910 F.2 831, 832 (Fed. Cir. 1990).

Legal cease and desist letter on patent infringement

Cease and Desist Letters

I have received a cease and desist letter

The letter claims that my company is infringing a US Patent.  Can you (and your company) ignore the letter? I wouldn’t recommend ignoring a letter. If your company ignores the cease and desist letter, your company could regret not responding to that letter.

How do I know if the cease and desist letter is valid?

An experienced patent attorney can assist you in determining if the claim of infringement has merit. Among other things, your patent counsel will review the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) record regarding the Patent. Additionally, your attorney will compare your company’s allegedly infringing goods and/or services against the USPTO record.

It is also wise to have your legal counsel prepare an opinion regarding whether or not your company’s goods or services are infringing the potential plaintiff’s Patent.

What are my company’s options?

When responding to an allegation of patent infringement, use experienced counsel. Your patent attorney may recommend any of the following options and/or actions. For example, you (or your company) could:

  • Secure an agreement with the Patent holder stating that your company’s goods and/or services do not infringe the Patent holder’s Patent
  • Enter into a license agreement with the Patent holder
  • Establish a cross-license agreement with the Patent holder
  • Phase-out and cease the use of your company’s allegedly infringing goods and/or services
  • Your company and the Patent holder may agree to mediation or arbitration
  • Join with other third parties receiving a similar cease and desist letter from the Patent holder and collectively litigate against the validity of the Patent holder’s Patent
  • Institute a USPTO Post Grant Procedure against the patentability and/or validity of the Patent holder’s Patent
  • In a federal district court, institute a Declaratory Action Judgment action against the Patent holder
  • After the Patent holder has instituted an infringement action against your company’s goods and/or services in a federal district court, counter-claim that the Patent holder’s Patent is invalid
  • After litigation is commenced in the federal court system, settle the matter

Costs to the company

As a general rule, costs for a USPTO Post Grant procedure are much less than the costs of litigating in the federal court system.  The costs associated with USPTO Post Grant procedures and mediation or arbitration can be similar.

If you have received a cease and desist letter and need legal assistance, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC. Likewise, if your company believes another company has infringed your Patent and you need to send a cease and desist letter, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business.

Business Patent Law, PLLC provides intellectual property and business counsel for businesses and companies.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your business and intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

US Patents Held By Foreign Companies

Foreign Companies and US Patents

Can Companies Outside the United States Obtain US Patents?

Yes. The United States has the largest Gross Domestic Product on earth. Foreign Companies that do not have a physical presence in the United States can sell their goods or services in the United States.

For most foreign companies, sales in the US market improve earnings for the foreign businesses.

Advantages of US Patents for Foreign Businesses

  • The United States has a long history of enforcing domestic or foreign Patentees’ rights
  • Granting a US Patent gives the Patentee the right to file a legal action to stop third parties from making, using or selling their patented invention
  • Under Title 35 of the United States Code, a foreign Patentee can sue an alleged infringer in a United States District court and win damages

Options for Foreign Companies

Foreign Companies filing a US Patent Application in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) may:

  • Initially file the US Patent Application in the USPTO
  • File a Patent Application in their company’s jurisdictional Patent Office followed by the subsequent filing of the US Patent Application (prior to the expiration of the treaty deadline)
  • Initially file a Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) Application in the USPTO followed by the subsequent filing of the US National Stage Application (prior to the expiration of the PCT Treaty deadline)
  • File a Patent Application in your company’s jurisdictional Patent Office followed by the subsequent filing of a PCT Application claiming priority to the initially filed jurisdictional Patent Application
  • Prior to the PCT Treaty deadline, file a US National Stage Application in the USPTO which claims priority to the PCT Application filed by your company that claimed priority to the initial Patent Application filed by your company in its jurisdictional Patent Office

Basic Requirements for Foreign Company Patent Filings

  • English language translation/transliteration of the jurisdictional Patent Application or PCT Application – if the language of the as-filed jurisdictional Patent Application or PCT Application was not English
  • Pay USPTO Processing Fees
  • Submit Specifications and Drawings
  • Claims – usually presented in an “Americanized” preliminary amendment format to increase clarity and minimize USPTO Processing Fees
  • Provide Inventor(s) Declaration(s)

If all this sounds a bit complex, we can help. Business Patent Law, PLLC provides intellectual property and business counsel for businesses and companies.

If you have questions about filing your company’s US Patent Application, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your business and intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

Retain Control of Patent Assets

Control Patent Assets

Who controls a Patent? Inventor? Company?

35 United States Code (U.S.C.) 101 reads as follows:

“Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefore . . . ” and this is the starting point for determining ownership of Patent Assets.

Last month’s blog included illustrations of how a company can lose control of its Patent Assets. This month we will explore steps you can take to retain control of your company’s patents.

Control of Patent Assets

Whenever possible, companies should limit the possibility that statutes and case law will determine the ownership of Patent Assets and other Intellectual Properties. To blindly believe that because the company paid someone to do something for the company, the company owns what was created is not always effective. It’s similar to people assuming that when they die without any estate planning, State law will distribute their property according to their wishes. It seldom works that way.

How to Better Control Company Patent Assets

Use contracts with employees, agents, and independent contractors to ensure the company’s ownership of the invention’s Intellectual Property rights. Some  conditions for control of Intellectual Property rights can include:

1. As a condition of employment, the employee agrees, in writing, that the company is the owner of:

  • all inventions invented by the employee; or
  • the inventions invented by the employee at any workplace provided by the company or with devices, tools, programs, etc. supplied by the company; or
  • the inventions invented by the employee that are associated with the company’s goods or services or the company’s pipeline of goods or services.

2. As a condition of employment, the employee gives the right of first refusal (in writing) to the company as to whether the company will own the invention.

3. Prior to hiring an agent or independent contractor, the company requires that agent/independent contractor to sign a written agreement stating that:

  • all the inventions invented by the agent/independent contractor at any workplace provided by the company or with devices, tools, programs, etc. supplied by the company are owned by the company; and/or
  • all inventions invented by the agent/independent contractor associated with the company’s goods or services or the company’s pipeline of goods or services belong to the company.

Control Your Company’s Patent Assets or Someone Else Will

An assignment document is used to transfer ownership of the invention’s intellectual property rights to the company.

If the employee will not agree to assign Patent Assets to the company as a condition of employment, hire someone who will.

The same approach should be applied to agents and/or independent contractors.

If you have questions about your company’s ownership of Patent assets, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and intellectual properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

Patent Ownership Determination

Who Owns Patents – It Depends

Ownership – Patents

Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution reads: [The Congress shall have power] “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.” The Constitution does not, however, address who owns the Patent or Copyright.

When an inventor invents a novel and non-obvious composition, device or method, who owns the Patent?

That depends.

Patent Rights Are Federal, But Patent Ownership Rights…

Under the United States Constitution and Title 35 of the United States Code, the granting and enforcement of Patents are exclusively matters of federal jurisdiction. However, unless owned by a federal entity, the ownership of Patents is a matter of State Law. Intellectual property ownership rights flow from Patents and who owns property rights is usually a matter determined by State Law,

Who Owns The Patent?

The following examples show how different situations impact or can impact the determination of Patent ownership:

Illustration 1

The Inventor is self-employed, invents the invention and is domiciled in State A.

The Inventor owns the entire interest in the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights.

Illustration 2

The Inventor is an employee of Company B. The Inventor invents the invention while at work on the premises of Company B. Both Company B and Inventor are domiciled in State A.

In most jurisdictions, Company B owns the entire interest in the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights.

Illustration 3

The Inventor is an employee of Company B and Company B is domiciled in State A. In the Inventor’s garage located in State Z, the Inventor invents the item related to the products sold by Company B.

Some courts would hold that Company B owns the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights while other courts would hold that the Inventor owns the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights.

Illustration 4

The Inventor is an employee of Company B that is located in State A. In the Inventor’s garage located in State Z. The Inventor invents an item not related to the anything manufactured or distributed by Company B.

Most courts would hold that the Inventor owns the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights.

Illustration 5

The Inventor is an Independent Contractor who has worked onsite, on and off, at Company B’s plant located in State P for more than a year. Company B’s headquarters are located in State A. The Independent Contractor invented an improvement to Company B’s patented product in State J.

Some courts would hold that Company B owns the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights. Other courts would hold that the Independent Contractor owns the Patent’s Intellectual Property Rights. Some States would not have any case law corresponding to this scenario.

Illustration 6

Company B is domiciled in State A and displays its patented product line at a trade show in State N. The chief engineer of Competitor X takes photographs/videos of Company B’s patented product line at the tradeshow. The chief engineer returns to Competitor X’s headquarters with the photos/videos. At the headquarters, located in State Q, Competitor X’s engineering staff invents several improvements to Company’s B patented product line which ultimately results in Improvement-Type Patents for Competitor X.

Courts would hold that Competitor X owns the Improvement-Type Patents – However, a federal court could also determine that Competitor X’s Improvement-Type Patents infringed Company B’s patented product line.

How to Control Ownership of Patents

What can a business do to limit its Intellectual Property from flying out in many different directions?  Next month’s blog will address some of these issues.

If you have questions about your company’s ownership of its Intellectual Properties, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and Intellectual Properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your Intellectual Property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

Personal Property Assets and Real Property Assets

Assets – Real – Personal

Personal Property Assets versus Real Property Assets

Most companies have both personal property and real property assets. As general rule, real property includes the land, building(s) attached to the land and fixtures attached to the building(s). A personal property asset is any asset other than real property.

The Relationship Between Real Property and Personal Property

Buildings, Structures and Fixtures are Tangible Real Property

By way of illustration, your plant’s building and its fixtures (such as cooling fans, ductwork and pipes) are generally considered tangible real property. Real property assets are tangible and can become tangible personal property assets. When an old cooling fan is replaced with a newer more efficient cooling fan, the new cooling fan becomes a tangible fixture and the old fan becomes tangible personal property.

Real Property Boundaries

A deed sets forth the boundary lines of the real property. Without permission of the land owner, anyone who crosses over the boundary lines of the real property may be charged with trespassing.

Patents are Usually Intangible Personal Property Assets

The claims of a Patent “stake out” the legal boundaries of the Patent. An analogy is the 1849 California Gold Rush where miners staked out their “gold fever” claims in the Sierra Nevada Mountains.

When the Patent claim remains valid, anyone who invades the space claimed by the Patentee without permission may become a defendant in an infringement suit. Staking your Patent infringement claims can be a “rough and tumble” adventure for both the plaintiff and the defendant. Under some select circumstances, that legal tousle may result in the defendant paying treble damages.

  • A few US Patents have been issued for real properties (e.g., building components attached to land), but most Patents are valuable intangible personal property assets.

Goods Covered by Patent Claims are Tangible Personal Property Assets

As noted above, Patents are generally intangible personal property assets. However, the widgets manufactured by your company that are covered by one or more claims of your Patent(s) are tangible personal properties which could also fall under the parameters of the Several States Uniform Commercial Codes. And if your widgets are medical devices, FDA approvals of the tangible personal properties are required before the widgets can be sold for medical use in patients.

Simultaneous Multiple Property Types

What happens when a situation arises where there are simultaneous real property, personal property and intellectual property issues? This will be addressed in a future post, so stay tuned!

If you have questions about intellectual property, tangible or intangible assets, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and intellectual properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

Patent Maintenance Fees & Annuities

Patent Maintenance Fees and Annuities

In most jurisdictions, utility-type Patents require that periodic patent maintenance fees or annual annuities be paid to maintain the Patent. These payments are usually made to the appropriate governmental body. Most jurisdictions, other than the United States, also require the payment of annual annuities.

United States Patent Maintenance Fees

Title 15 of the United States Code requires the owner of a utility US Patent to pay maintenance fees at three and one-half, seven and one-half and eleven and one-half years subsequent to the issue date of the US Patent.

What Happens if the US Patent’s Maintenance Fee Is Not Paid?

The Patent will expire if the fee is not paid prior to the expiration of the fourth, eighth or twelfth year subsequent to the issue date of the Patent.

An Example Case: Unpaid Patent Maintenance Fees

Due to a Programmer’s Error, Company A did not Generate the Payment for the Seven and One-Half Year Maintenance Fee for Company A’s US Patent for “Gizmo.”

At this point, Company B approaches Company A regarding a license of the “Gizmo” Patent. Is it possible for Company A to enter into a Valid License Agreement with Company B?

Scenario 1

Seven years and nine months subsequent to the issue date of the Gizmo Patent, Company A discovers the maintenance fee was not paid:

  • Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.362(e), by paying the maintenance fee and the surcharge during the “grace period,” Company A and Company B can enter into a license for the Gizmo.

Scenario 2

Nine years subsequent to the issue date of the Gizmo Patent, Company A discovers the maintenance fee was not paid:

  • Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.378, by filing a petition with the Director of Patents stating that the failure to pay the maintenance fee was unintentional, paying the USPTO fee for the petition and the required maintenance fee, the Director may reinstate the expired Gizmo Patent. As a general rule, the Director usually reinstates an expired Patent as long as these above mentioned conditions are met before two years subsequent to the expiration of the Patent.  Subject to any intervening rights, Company A and Company B can enter into a license for the Gizmo.

Scenario 3

Ten and one-half years subsequent to the issue date of the Gizmo Patent, Company A discovers the maintenance fee was not paid:

  • Pursuant to 37 CFR 1.378, by filing a petition with the Director of Patents stating that the failure to pay the maintenance fee was unintentional, paying the USPTO fee for the petition and the required maintenance fee, the Director may reinstate the expired Gizmo Patent. As a general rule, after two years subsequent the expiration of a Patent, the Director exercises more discretion in reinstating any expired Patent. Subject to favorable decision by the Director to reinstate the Patent and any intervening rights, Company A and Company B can enter into a license for the Gizmo.

If you have questions about your company’s Patent maintenance fees or annuities, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and intellectual properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

Multijurisdictional Patent Infringement World Patents

Multijurisdictional Patent Infringement

Patent Cooperation Treaty Patent Applications have the potential to mature into Patents in most nations, but currently, there is no enforceable World Patent. Unaddressed Patent infringement can reduce your company’s profits.

Patent Rights in Multiple Jurisdictions

Many companies own patent rights in at least some of the jurisdictions in which they conduct business.

What If We Don’t Own Patent Rights in Jurisdictions Where We Do Business?

A frequent multijurisdictional situation is:

My Company owns ten US Patents, three European Patents, five Chinese Patents and three Japanese Patents. The Patents cover the company’s fifth most profitable product.

At a tradeshow in Singapore, our regional vice president discovers that a Vietnamese company has duplicated our invention and is exporting the duplicated invention to Australia, Canada and Japan. Further, the Vietnamese company intends to export the invention to Germany and the United States.

What Can You Do About “Knock offs” of Your Product Overseas?

As a general rule, Patent rights are only enforceable in the jurisdiction that granted the Patent.

  • In Australia and Canada, your company owns no Patent Rights and cannot stop the importation and use of the knock off in those jurisdictions
  • If Germany is one of the European nations covered by the European Patents, then your company can utilize European counsel to assert its Patent rights in Germany
  • In Japan, your company can use Japanese counsel to enforce its Japanese Patent rights
  • In the United States, your company can utilize US counsel to enforce its Patent rights that can include a court order to stop the knock offs at the port of entry

In the global economy, when another determines that your Company’s product is profitable, it is almost inevitable that someone will attempt to “bend the rules” and trade on your Company’s market share and goodwill for their own financial gain. Without Patent rights, you have little to no recourse in most jurisdictions.

What Should My Company Do To Prevent Patent Problems?

It is astute to procure Patent rights in all jurisdictions where your business plan, business model, actual and projected market forces justify the procurement of intellectual property.

A small front-end investment in intellectual property can reap increased future multijurisdictional sales.

If you have questions about your company’s multijurisdictional intellectual properties, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and intellectual properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

How To Expedite Foreign Patents

How to Expedite Foreign Patents

Will a US Patent Application Expedite Foreign Patents?

Yes, one way to expedite foreign patents is to apply for a US Patent. This approach can expedite procurement of foreign Patents in many foreign jurisdictions.

Under European Patent Office practice, the grant of a US Patent may or may not correlate with the expedited grant of its parallel European Patent.

Three General Rules for Domestic and Foreign Patents

  • The sooner the Nonprovisional Patent Application is filed, the sooner the Patent can issue
  • In most jurisdictions, the sooner the Patent issues, the less expense incurred by the Patentee
  • The sooner the Patent issues, the sooner the Patentee has enforceable patent rights, and the sooner the Patent can become a wealth-generating asset

Business Strategy to Expedite Foreign Patents (Example)

  • Regardless of the nationality of the Patent Applicant, file a Patent Application in the USPTO
  • It best for your company to originally file a Provisional, Nonprovisional or PCT Application in the USPTO — however, if the Provisional, Nonprovisional or PCT Application was first filed in another jurisdiction, a US Nonprovisional Application can be filed in the USPTO until the US statutory deadline has passed
  • If a PCT Application is not the first Application filed, a PCT Application claiming priority to a Provisional or Nonprovisional Application is filed in a PCT Receiving Office (preferably, the USPTO Receiving Office)
  • File a US Nonprovisional Patent Application shortly after the PCT Application was filed, rather than waiting until near the deadline allowed by the PCT
  • By using this procedure, it is possible for your company to receive the grant of the US Patent before parallel Applications filed in other jurisdictions are examined
  • As previously indicated, the grant of a US Patent can expedite the grant of parallel Patents in many foreign jurisdictions

If you have questions about cost-efficient business strategies for filing your company’s Patent Applications, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and intellectual properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.

Foreign Jurisdictions for Patents

Patent Applications – Foreign Jurisdictions

How To Select the Best Path for Patent Applications in Foreign Jurisdictions

My company is contemplating filing Patent Applications in foreign jurisdictions. Is the use of the Patent Cooperation Treaty or the Paris Convention Treaty the better route?

Patent Cooperation Treaty vs. Paris Convention Treaty

Your business model and judgement determine the best course for the filing of Patent Applications in foreign jurisdictions. Both the Paris Convention Treaty and the Patent Cooperation Treaty routes have advantages and disadvantages.

Under each Treaty, the Applicant makes a claim to the priority application (document) that was filed in a jurisdiction other than the jurisdiction (country/region/union) which you desire to file the new Patent Application. The priority document can be a non-provisional, a provisional or an international Patent Application.

The Paris Convention Treaty

  • The non-provisional Patent Application must be filed before the expiration of one year following the filing of the priority document
  • For US businesses, the priority document is usually a US provisional or non-provisional Patent Application
  • If you are only filing in a few foreign jurisdictions, the Paris Convention will likely be the least expensive route to file the foreign Patent Application
  • Most foreign jurisdictions require annual maintenance fees to perpetuate pendency of the Patent Application/Patent

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)

  • The non-provisional Patent Application must be filed before the expiration of thirty months (some jurisdictions allow thirty-one months) following the filing of the priority document
  • For US businesses, the priority document is usually a US provisional or non-provisional Patent Application
  • The PCT Application can be filed as the original and priority document
  • An International Search Report is generated by the International Searching Authority of the World Intellectual Property Organization
  • When needed, the International Search Report can provide a basis for amending the claims of the PCT Application prior to entry into the national stage of a foreign jurisdiction’s Patent Office or the United States Patent Office.
  • Amendment of the claims of a PCT Application prior to entry into the national stage can result in a speedier and more cost-effective issuance of a Patent in the United States or a foreign jurisdiction
  • Most foreign jurisdictions require annual maintenance fees to perpetuate pendency of the Patent Application/Patent

If you have questions about filing Patent Applications under the Paris Convention Treaty or the Patent Cooperation Treaty, please contact Business Patent Law, PLLC and we will discuss possibilities for your business and intellectual properties.

If you would like to stay up-to-date with news that impacts your intellectual property, sign up for Business Patent Law’s Monthly Mailer™ newsletter.