» Brooks Acordia Patent Attorney Explains Improvements to Existing Inventions

Brooks Acordia Patent Attorney Explains Improvements to Existing Inventions

Los Angeles, CA (Law Firm Newswire) February 13, 2014 – Many patents cover inventions that are improvements over existing devices (as opposed to completely new devices).

Novice inventors and others new to the field of intellectual property often wonder whether a small improvement to a patented invention may ever receive patent protection of its own. But as a local intellectual property attorney explained, so-called “improvement inventions” actually constitute the majority of patents issued. Wholly new inventions are a relative rarity.

“Most patents, by far, cover improvements to existing technology,” said Los Angeles patent attorney Pejman Yedidsion. “Pioneering inventions are not that common. Many inventions consist of new combinations of old technologies that may produce unexpected results, or that stem from a long-felt but unmet need.”

One example of an improvement to existing technology was the Gillette Mach 3 razor, which had three blades — existing patented razors on the market had two at the time.

Improvements to existing inventions commonly utilize new technology to update older products. When microprocessors became widespread and cost-effective, many devices that used analog circuitry were improved with the new technology. Those improvements were eligible for patent protection.

Additionally, when a new use for an existing product is invented, that innovation may qualify for patent protection. For example, a product called Bag Balm, invented in 1899, was originally used in dairy operations to soothe a cow’s irritated udders. Over time, its use widened to the treatment of chapped skin for many animals and humans. Eventually, it was discovered to be an effective treatment for male pattern baldness, due to its moisturizing properties. In 2000, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit allowed a patent covering this new use of the 100-year-old formula.

“When an inventor improves upon an existing invention, no matter how small the improvement may seem, we encourage them to consult with us on the patentability of the work,” added Yedidsion. “You may be surprised at how useful small changes can be.”

Brooks Acordia IP Law, P.C.
1445 E. Los Angeles Ave. #108
Simi Valley, CA 93065-2827
Phone: (805) 579-2500
Fax: (805) 584-6427

Twitter

Facebook

Google+

  • How the America Invents Act weakens the grace period for disclosure of inventions
    It is crucial for inventors to understand what constitutes prior art in the post-America Invents Act (AIA) era. <br />
    Under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1), public disclosures are prior art — and therefore preclude the patentability of an invention. Public disclosures include patents, descriptions in printed publications, public use, availability for sale or other availability to the public.<br />
    Prior to the AIA, only domestic disclosures were considered prior art. That geographic limitation no longer exists. The phrase “otherwise available to the public” ...
  • Google Books case illustrates the four factors of fair use
    In November 2013, U.S. Circuit Judge Denny Chin hastened the end of years of legal wrangling over the legality of Google’s scanning and indexing of copyrighted works for its Google Books project. In Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google Inc., SDNY, No. 05 Civ. 8136 (DC), Judge Chin ruled that Google’s work amounted to “fair use” of the books.<br />
    “Fair use” is an exception to a copyright holder’s exclusive right to the use of a protected work. The United States Code ...
  • Speedy Patent Prosecution, Part Four: Patent Prosecution Highway
    The Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) is a program applicable to inventors filing applications for a single invention in multiple nations or jurisdictions. When one or more claims on one such application have been ruled patentable by one participating nation’s patent office, the corresponding claims on applications filed with another participating nation’s office may be fast-tracked.<br />
    For example, an applicant may seek a patent on his invention in both the United States and Canada. If the Canadian Intellectual Property Office allows ...

See other news sources publishing this article. BETA | Tags: , , , , ,



Get headlines from Law Firm Newswire sent right to your inbox.

* indicates required