What are the Costs of Obtaining a U.S. Patent? – Part 2
by admin - January 16th, 2015. Filed under: IP Management.In continuing this series of posts, let me describe two scenarios: (1) a doctor walks into my office with an idea for a new medical instrument. During the initial interview, he draws a freehand sketch and instructs me to draft a patent application; and (2) an engineer sends me a complete “invention disclosure” providing a detailed description of his invention, a PowerPoint Presentation describing the invention for investors, accompanying drawings, a Solid Works “edrawing” computer model, known prior art, and procedure detailing how to use the invention.
Assuming the level of complexity between the two inventions is about the same, which application will be less expensive? Obviously (in my mind at least), the engineer’s invention will be cheaper to draft and file – by thousands of dollars.
While it is true that I have to wade through a lot of information from the engineer, more information is always better. Furthermore, it is quicker to cut and paste sections of existing text than to draft from a blank computer screen. (By the way, this situation is entirely hypothetical – in my experience, engineers also hate to write.)
In the doctor’s situation, before I begin drafting, I will have to research existing inventions, medical procedures, etc. I will also instruct either an outside draftsman to produce patent drawings or have a paralegal produce a 3D model in Sketchup. Researching takes time and time costs money. Furthermore, because I am not a doctor, I might miss an important nuance about the invention or the method of using the procedure.
Thus, a well-considered, clearly written, comprehensive invention disclosure can reduce patent costs and result in better patent protection. In principle, no one knows more about an invention than the inventor. If the patent attorney is to perform a proper patentability search, evaluate the search, and do a good job of preparing and prosecuting the patent application, it is critical that the inventor provide the attorney with specific written guidance in the form of an invention disclosure. Most patent attorneys will provide invention disclosure forms as well as the appropriate instructions.
As discussed in my previous post in this series, a patent is a trade you make with the government. The government grants you a monopoly for your invention. In return, you must increase public knowledge. For you to increase public knowledge, the patent application must contain enough detail to teach others how to make and use your invention. Patents which just describe an idea, without teaching others how to make and use the invention, are invalid or can be invalidated.
So, just presenting an idea to your patent attorney will force him to develop the idea into an invention (if he is doing his job). This will be an expensive endeavor. While most patent attorneys are engineers, we are not efficient engineers and we are expensive. Thus, it almost always less expensive to either develop the idea into an invention yourself or pay an engineer to develop the idea.
The patent disclosure does not need to be as detailed as a performance specification, but it should contain enough detail so that a person of ordinary skill in the art can make and use the invention after reading the disclosure.
Thus, providing a detailed disclosure will increase the quality of the patent and be less expensive than just presenting an “idea” to your patent attorney.
For more information, contact Bill Naifeh at www.naifeh.com.