» Should an Inventor Prototype or Patent First?  Brooks Acordia Intellectual Property Attorney Gives His View

Should an Inventor Prototype or Patent First? Brooks Acordia Intellectual Property Attorney Gives His View

Los Angeles, CA (Law Firm Newswire) February 20, 2014 - Inventors often struggle to decide whether to develop a prototype of their invention before filing a patent application.

Inventors are not required to create a working prototype of their invention before filing a patent application. A local patent attorney says that no one solution is right for every inventor.

“There are advantages and disadvantages to prototyping,” said Los Angeles intellectual property attorney Jim Dawson. “If the inventor intends to license their patent rights, a prototype can represent an unnecessary expense. Licensees often wish to implement changes to the original design and have no use for a prototype. However, a working prototype can be very useful in marketing the invention.”

A patent application must describe the invention in sufficient detail to allow a person of “ordinary skill” in that invention’s technology area to make and use it. If the inventor is unable to describe the invention in such a way, further research and development will be required, which might best be accomplished by prototyping.

During the prototyping process, it is very common for the inventor to change details about the invention and to improve its design.

If an inventor chooses to file an application before developing a prototype — or to forgo prototyping entirely — and new features or improvements of the invention emerge during the process, a second patent application covering the new features or improvements may be warranted. A patent attorney can help inventors decide, from an intellectual property standpoint, whether to file a second application. An inventor must also consider whether an additional patent is worth its cost from a business standpoint.

If an inventor develops a prototype before filing an application, it can help to ensure that the patent application captures the fully developed invention at its most complete. Because it is important that the original inventor own the entire developed invention, a development agreement should be used to assign all IP rights in the prototyping work to the original inventor.

“It is also a good idea to file a provisional patent application as soon as possible,” added Dawson. “This ensures an earlier priority date for the core invention, which is very important in the post-America Invents Act (AIA) “first to file” system.”

The (AIA), signed into law in 2011, changed U.S. patent law to award patents to the first inventor to file an application (as opposed to the first to invent). Provisional patent applications have low fees and do not require a particular format.

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+

  • More Guidance on What Software IS and IS NOT Patentable
    In a recent holding of Finjan Holdings, Inc., the Federal Circuit cited to another decision saying that they had previously concluded virus scanning is well-known, an abstract idea, and not patentable.  However, after further review, the Finjan patent  appeared to be claiming a method of operating differently than traditional virus scans that tagged as being previously-identified viruses.  In doing so, the Federal Circuit characterized the Finjan family of patents as using a “behavior-based” approach as compared to a “code-matching” approach of ...
  • Right to Use and Resell Patented Products
    The U.S. Supreme Court in a recent ruling has opined on the rights of a purchaser to use and resell patented products.<br />
    The patent system give the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, and selling the patented invention, for the life of the patent. The right to exclude, however, is subject to the rule of patent exhaustion – upon the sale of a patented product, the patent owner’s patent rights are exhausted and the buyer is ...
  • Trademark Cancellation Proceedings
    The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) provides administrative procedures for contesting the validity of a trademark registration through a procedure known as cancellation proceeding via a “Petition to Cancel” an already registered mark. This procedure is useful to eliminate an interfering trademark registration or to weaken an opponent’s threatening litigation. It is also useful to cancel a mark that perhaps should not have been obtained and is now being cited against your pending application. The cancellation proceeding is essentially a micro-lawsuit within the USPTO and ...

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



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

* indicates required