One more thing about patents . . .
Intellectual property, of course, is a vital part of our business. And the patent process in the United States has some real issues.
In an earlier post (and the posts on this blog are a LOT earlier -- I'll try to improve our posting frequency) I menioned that some patents are taking as long as three years to grind their way through the system.
Well, I may have understated the problem.
At least one compay we've been following (NanoGram) filed a patent in June 2000 that covered using certain kinds of nanoparticles in batteries. Their patent was issued in May 2007 -- almost 7 years later!
I'm don't think this is typical, but it certainly can be looked at as a symptom of the backlog and (probably) staffing needs at the US Patent Office.
In an earlier post (and the posts on this blog are a LOT earlier -- I'll try to improve our posting frequency) I menioned that some patents are taking as long as three years to grind their way through the system.
Well, I may have understated the problem.
At least one compay we've been following (NanoGram) filed a patent in June 2000 that covered using certain kinds of nanoparticles in batteries. Their patent was issued in May 2007 -- almost 7 years later!
I'm don't think this is typical, but it certainly can be looked at as a symptom of the backlog and (probably) staffing needs at the US Patent Office.
posted by Dave Walker at
12:04 PM
1 Comments:
If patent applications were written more clearly, and the claims made less sweeping and more realistic they could be processed (and granted) far faster.
The patent examiner usually leaves an indication regarding what he/she wants to see in the application, or where the unsupportable claims are. Smart applicants (include laywers) will see that and re-write the application in such manner as to be acceptible to the examiner. Approval can follow very quickly if the product/process is indeed patentable.
Post a Comment
<< Home