Patents for ARtificial intelligence (widely misunderstood)
We can Help you (but expect difficulty)
The elements of a patent disclosure are difficult to briefly explain.. Its an especial difficulty with AI concepts, which are often software-based and algorithm-based.
AI Patent disclosures often bump up against 35 USC 101
Patents having components of Artificial Intelligence often are Rejected or Objected to using a specific statute called 35 USC 101. Such Rejections are sometimes referred to as "Subject Matter" Rejections.
Structure your AI disclosures to emphasize the practical and tangible
Patent dislcosures should not be conjecture and speculation, and should have clarity and emphasize practical usages. This applies to all patent disclosures, but is sometimes overlooked with AI concepts, which are often based on vague and impractical academic papers.
Academic Papers often do not translate into Patent Disclosures
We have transformed countless academic papers into patents, but often the transition is a painful one that is resisted by the authors.
The US Patent Office is "loaded for bear" on AI applications
Do not under-estimate the ability of the US Patent Office to get in the way of anything they consider to be a fad or a concept having questionable scientific validity. Let us help you structure the disclosure to avoid problems, contact us anytime.
patent searches
The single most misunderstood problem in all of patent law!
PATENT SEARCHES
Again, in order to fulfill SEO requirements, below is a list of term to illustrate to SEO engines that this page likely will have high relevancy for the searcher. Its not possible to use every one of these search terms in a sentence, and numerous of them contain improper word-usage and misuse patent terms. For me to find my audience, and my audience to find me, I need to include this metadata in the body of my web-pages. If there were another easier way to alert the search engines, I have yet to hear of it.
Regarding any searches using keywords "patent check", "patent search tools", "ip search", "patent filing search", "food patent examples", "patent prior art", "patent prior art search", "prior art", "patent evaluation", "how to find a patent, "patent research", "provisional patent search", "patent lookup", "advanced patent search", "patent search services", "ip patent search", "uspto patent application search", "how to check if a product is patented", "how to research patents", "patent application search", and "patent search cost", well, you are in the right place! These are extremely salient and relevant queries, requiring careful consideration and are important to discuss.
First, every single inventor should know how to use the patent search database at uspto.gov, and should not rely on counsel or someone else to understand how this resource works. Its too important. All inventors should learn this.
Next, regarding "provisional patent search", provisional applications are not published and thus cannot be searched. There is no way to independently affirm or verify that someone has filed Provisionally without seeing their filing Receipt. Still, we include this Keyword in the body of this webpage, because a lot of people enter this keyword and we want the SEO to be aware that this page contains a proper response.
Be aware! Bad news is coming! Patent searches are hugely misunderstood (and often over-valued)
If you queried any of the below, you are in the right place! The list includes "patent check", "patent search tools", "ip search", "patent filing search", "food patent examples", "patent prior art", "sell your idea without a patent", "patent prior art search", "prior art", "patent evaluation", "how to find a patent", "patent research", "provisional patent search", "patent lookup", "advanced patent search", "patent search services", "ip patent search" "uspto patent application search", "how to check if a product is patented", "how to research patents", "patent application search", "patent search cost".
Lets get the bad news out right away. Doing a patent search has value, but not for the reasons you likely think. This is an area that inventors are consistently mistaken.
First, any search performed by an inventor usually means absolutely nothing to the patent Examiner, who will do his/her own search. This will likely be a much better search. As a former Examiner I sometimes do searches for clients, but am always careful to educate my client that it doesn't matter what we find or don't find.
The job of a patent Examiner is, among other things, to guard the US Patent System from Allowances that should not have happened. This protects the integrity of the US patent system. But it also means that all applicants should plan to be Rejected on their First, Second, and usually Third Office Actions (documents from the patent Examiner).
This means it will be years before anyone gets a patent, and only after a lot of rejection and expense. A quick guide to effective patent searching can be found here.
I have been practicing patent law for >23 years. I often act as an inventor's "second patent attorney" because a) their first patent attorney $charged $too $much, and b) did not properly communicate how the patent system really works. And then the inventor fired that law firm, and went looking for someone else to clean up the mess. That someone else is often this law firm.
One of the biggest cons we see is attorneys selling an innocent, naive inventor a $2000 patent search. They convince the inventor that their chances of getting a patent are relatively high, based on this search.
What these attorneys don't properly communicate is that the chances of getting a patent are directly proportional to length and depth of disclosure. That means the patent disclosure should have at least 20 pages of text-Description and at least 15 pages of Drawings. This clear, easy-to-understand metric has a far, FAR higher correlation with success at getting a patent application Allowed than ANY search of ANY kind. Meanwhile, patent searches are never described as a "clear, easy-to-understand metric", because they are not. They are vague, indefinite, by their nature highly speculative, and close to useless. Don't buy one of these!
Inventors: always make your patent disclosures long, with a lot of depth. Lots of drawings and text. Always. This is the single biggest indicator, by far, as to whether someone will get a patent or not. Not a Patent Search that you performed yourself! Those don't mean anything to the Patent Office! Yet all patent Applicants are required by Federal Law to submit all Patent Searches to the Examiner. Failure to do this is a Federal Offense (35 CFR 1.56, AKA "Rule 56").
This is one of the single biggest myths and canards in the entire patent/invention industry, and we see this much more than other problems and disappointments. Even if the search had favorable results, if the attorney wrote the patent disclosure to be too brief, not enough embodiments, not enough variations, not enough drawings, not enough pages, these inventors often don't get a patent. Despite the favorable search results, many inventors do not get a patent! And they are upset!
Next, be aware, patent Examiners do not just search patents for their Prior Art Rejections, but also search YouTube, Amazon, Kickstarter, eBay, Instagram, Google, and many other non-patent resources. These can yield an immense amount of useful information and Prior Art. With the area of Mobile App inventions (tens of thousands of Mobile Apps have patent protection), an inventor can plan on the patent Examiner researching and asserting other Mobile Apps found in either iTunes, Google Play, or other Mobile App repositories.
Do your own patent search! Don't pay anyone!
We are not against patent searching. We are against misinterpreting the results of any patent search. We operate by some simple rules in this area.
1) Do your own patent search! Don't pay anyone!
2) Use the patents you find as templates an guides on how to set up your own patent disclosure. The best way to learn patent drafting is to read Issued patents! And that is good for any inventor to know!
3) Do not assume that the patent search you perform indicates any useful information about a) whether you will get a patent, and/or b) whether your invention will commercialize or not. Patent searches have nothing to do with either of these!
unusual patent strategies (that can save money)
Not Legal Advice! Just raising awareness
PATENT PODCASTS
If you searched on "patent discussion", "patent audio discussion", "patent podcast", this site hosts a very limited set of audio recordings discussing various patent issues.
TRADEMARKS
If your concern is "how much to patent a name", "protect my brand", "how to patent a slogan", "trademark my brand", "protect a brand", "how to patent a word", "can you patent a name", these are not patent-related inquiries, but instead trademark-related.
Certainly feel free to ask us your trademark questions directly here, but this is more of a patent site.
Our trademark site is USAtrademarks.info, and the above questions, and many others, are answered there.
PATENT CLAIMS
If you search on "method patent", "product and process patent", we are happy to discuss this! And this is an intelligent search, and we wish more inventors were informed on this. Its a very often-overlooked aspect of patent law.
PATENT LADDERING
Because Provisional patent applications are so low-cost (as low as $70/apiece), we always like to recommend inventors self-file lots of Provisional applications. Depending on how much the invention pivots and changes, and also on how many offers for sales and public disclosures are made, there are ways to "ladder" Provisional and even Utility patent filings . This is somewhat similar to a "bond ladder" strategy. Its hard to briefly explain, except that doing lots of patent filings at hopefully low cost is a patent strategy that can have better than average RoI.
It is possible to file new and distinct Provisional patent applications any time you want, and put anything in it you want. Just remember, each separate Provisional has a separate filing date and conveys a separate bundle of legal rights. However, in some cases, these legal rights can be combined. That is, a Utility patent application can claim Priority to >1 Provisional filing. This in a way provides a “best of both worlds” scenario. An inventor can achieve multiple filing dates (important), and yet obtain multiple sets of coverage.
Once an inventor gets to Utility stage, its necessary to be a bit more committed to a specific embodiment. At Utility stage, strive for at least 20 pages of Specification (text) and at least 15 pages of drawings).
Prior to Utility stage, inventors should feel free to experiment, try out different versions and embodiments of their invention(s), and write up and file the ones they think will sell.
There is another feature of this filing-strategy that corresponds to bond-laddering. That is letting certain of the lower rated bonds expire. If interest rates go up, do not renew that bond. By the same token, if one invention does not appear to be on a good path towards commercialization, while another invention does, allow the "dud" Provisional to just lapse (expire), without transforming it into Utility.
There are many other factors involved in doing this, such as 35 USC 102 implications, but this portion of the website is intended to explain patent laddering, not give legal advice.
PATENT STAGGERING (SCHEDULING OF SELF-FILINGS)
No, this has nothing to do with getting your favorite patent staggeringly drunk. Instead, its a patent-strategy that is a derivative of patent-laddering. Patent staggering refers to an inventor that is doing regular improvements and alterations to one or more inventions, including unrelated inventions. The word "staggering" relates to doing this according to some kind of schedule, e.g. every 3 months, dropping all new drawings, photographs, spreadsheets, and write-up into PDF files and then self-filing them. At $70/filing, its a cost-effective way to make sure innovations all get covered as they happen.
This is especially helpful for an inventor who is working on e.g. 5 different inventions, and is unsure which of them may be the first to commercialize. Put them all into one single omnibus filing, and throw the whole thing into the patent office for $70.
Regarding patents, make sure you understand what you will be spending, and that you understand the RoI! Its very uncertain! Think of patents more as "invention insurance", a legally required instrument, but one in which the RoI is often very diffused and unclear.
Provisional v. utility v. international patents, why this choice is difficult.
The difference between a Provisional patent application versus a Utility patent application versus an International patent application are large, and profound. Its important than an inventor have some idea of how these play off each other. But its very deep and difficult to briefly explain, thus is given its own separate page. This condensed explanation appears at the link below.
Patents are difficult, & expensive
If you want to know more about patent strategies, you need to be realistic about how the patent system really works, including some uncomfortable truths.
Visit our section "The Truth About Patents".