Where To Display Patent Pending On A Drawing

Light bulb sketch If yous are going to file a patent awarding you must accept drawings to include in the application, only patent drawings are non the but type of "drawings" that an inventor should be considering. Patent drawings are wonderful for a patent application, but they don't always do the invention justice if you are trying to capture the attention of a prospective licensee, or if you are trying to convince a heir-apparent to place orders or sell the invention in their store.

But stated, patent drawings and other types of invention drawings, such as 3D renderings and photograph realistic virtual prototypes serve different purposes. For instance, take a look at the figure below, provided courtesy of Enhance Innovations a product development visitor with a great bargain of experience licensing and developing products in consumer markets. The patent illustration is on the left, and a branded, photo realistic virtual paradigm is shown on the right. Which do you think would better capture the attending of a prospective licensee?

Of course, the patent cartoon contains reference numerals that are used past the patent chaser in theDetailed Description of the patent application, and this is a perfectly fine illustration to include in a patent awarding. But remember, the bespeak of the Detailed Description is to describe what is shown in the figures (at a minimum). This is done in writing as if the reader is standing adjacent to yous as you describe what the figure shows. You utilise the reference numerals to draw the attention of the reader to the part of the figure y'all are discussing at any given time. That, still, is noise when you are trying to capture the attending of a prospective licensee. What you need and want is something that allows the person you lot are pitching to speedily and easily envision the product as information technology volition exist sold. Equally necessary every bit patent drawings are they merely do not capture the consumer product with nearly the same impact as a 3D rendering does.

[[Advertisement]]

With patent drawings you lot can bear witness exploded views (meet effigy below) that permit you to show how the pieces and parts fit together. This enables the patent attorney to draw how to make the invention footstep past step, which is not but a good idea but a requirement for whatever patent awarding. Of grade, such exploded views invariably focus on the internal, non the external. Will a prospective licensee really exist concerned, at least in the get-go instance, nigh the internal workings? A prospective licensee will no doubt want to know almost the internal workings and how everything is put together, but that comes only after y'all take captured their attention and they are ready, willing and interested to learn more. Then in the first instance a 3D rendering or photo realistic virtual prototype is far more likely to capture the attention of the prospective licensee. Yous want to grab them with a compelling visual presentation of a real and tangible product. Once they are interested you can go deeper.

Exploded view taken from U.S. Patent No. 5,839,263.

Taken from U.S. Patent No. 5,839,263, which relates to a lawn mower blade with replacement knives.

A patent bidder is required* to furnish at least one patent drawing (sometimes referred to as a patent illustration) of the invention whenever the invention is capable of illustration by way of a cartoon. Said some other way, whenever a drawing would assistance in the understanding of an invention yous need at least one patent drawing. Based on my feel I can say that a patent drawing is nearly always required, and even if it is non technically required you lot should take at least one patent drawing. Why take the take chances that the patent examiner will require patent drawings? If you need a patent cartoon and ane is not provided in the original filing a non-provisional patent awarding you are not even awarded a filing date, which can be catastrophic. Thus, I urge inventors to empathise the patent drawing requirement in this way: The but time patent drawings are not required is when the invention relates to a chemical chemical compound, limerick or a method.

In my opinion it is always better to be safe than sad with drawings. That is why I always abet for filing patent applications with more drawings. Drawings are non costless, only they do not cost very much given the overall cost of filing for and obtaining a patent. I call up nigh applications include too few drawings. It is, therefore, appropriate to file with multiple drawings. For more than on working with patent drawings come acrossPatent Drawings 101: The Way to Amend Patent Applications.

[[Advertisement]]

Detailed drawings are indeed worth m words, if not more. This is truthful because if you accidentally leave something out of the written disclosure, a drawing you submit may save you in the long run, provided of course it is detailed enough to convey nuanced information nigh your invention. Because the particular of the patent drawing is what saves you, having a professional patent illustrator is quite wise. Without question, the best way to augment the scope of any application is to file the awarding with multiple, detailed and professional person drawings. The benefit received from professional patent illustration is well worth the investment.

So you should rush off to a patent illustrator and get your invention illustrated with numerous drawings showing a multifariousness of views from different vantage points, right? To quote Lee Corso of ESPN Higher Football Gameday fame – Not and then fast my friend!

What if you could become initial illustrations that tin be used for multiple different purposes? That would make the most sense considering information technology is more economic, and you tin can if you work with someone that does 3D rendering.

According to Mike Store, an Industrial Designer with Enhance Innovations, "The reality is that completing product development, through design, technology, tooling, etc. is very expensive and isn't feasible for the average inventor with a great idea. Our services seek to key in on developing a feasible product by fleshing it out with the inventor, designing it in CAD." In fact, if you look at the image beneath which shows the Enhance process, Enhance starts with the inventor concept and moves on to concept sketching before engaging in 3D CAD production development.

From the 3D CAD renderings a photo realistic virtual prototype is created, which can and then exist branded and added to the sell sheet. By following this procedure the 3D CAD renderings can be output as line drawings that make exceptionally good patent drawings, at least for a provisional patent application where the focus is disclosure. The Patent Part will never examine a provisional patent application, and then none of the picky patent cartoon rules will be enforced against provisional patent drawings. Therefore, you merely demand to have quality line drawings for a provisional patent application. Once the 3D CAD renderings are washed as many drawings as y'all want can be output, from diverse rotated viewpoints, likewise as a variety of close-upward views.

True, patent drawings must testify every feature of the invention specified in the claims, and for a not-provisional patent application they are required to be in a particular form. The Patent Office specifies the size of the cartoon sheet on which the illustration is fabricated, the type of paper, the margins, and many other hyper-technical details relating to the making of the drawings, including shading and size of text if present. The reason for specifying the standards in detail is that the drawings are printed and published in a uniform style when the patent issues, and the drawings must also be such that they can be readily understood by persons using the patent descriptions. But none of these rules apply to provisional patent drawings, and the focus of a provisional patent application is to demonstrate the entirety of the invention. What better style to practise that than with numerous drawings that take been output afterward a 3D CAD rendering? Thus, the 3D CAD rendering becomes for focal point for allowing the inventor to obtain all of the types of illustrations they will demand initially.

[[Advertisement]]

Equally you move frontwards to the photograph realistic virtual prototyping, which is anywhere from ten to 100 times cheaper than developing a unmarried real-world prototype, the creation of the "sell sheet" becomes disquisitional for those who are looking to license their invention. Trevor Lambert, President of Lambert & Lambert, a group of licensing specialists that work on a contingency basis, explains:

Our sell sheets feature the production blueprint adult through 3D CAD software with large photo-realistic rendered images of the production. Unremarkably we will even brand the product with the potential licensee'south brand, so each sell sheet is tailored for a specific licensee. This allows the decision makers to visualize what the product would await similar fully developed under their product line. This becomes a powerful sales tool and something I refer to as a "psychological bridge" that nosotros take establish greatly improves the license success charge per unit.

With your invention the ultimate goal is to brand money. To make money requires one to spend money, only y'all absolutely have to do that wisely so that you do not run out of funds halfway through a project. Inventors need to create a budget and exercise the virtually they can with the money they have to spend. If your goal is to attract a licensing bargain yous demand to brand your invention as real as possible. Creating a virtual prototype that can be added to a sell sheet and circulated is definitely a winning strategy. The fact that the steps toward that strategy will give you a plethora of patent drawings to include in a provisional patent filing is a bonus! After all, you are likely going to need to file the provisional patent awarding in lodge to take the first steps toward securing exclusive rights. That way y'all have something tangible to license in terms of visual presentation and in terms of intellectual property protection.

Happy inventing!

_______

* Starting December xviii, 2022, information technology is now possible to obtain a filing date on a nonprovisional patent application without a drawing being present at the fourth dimension of filing. This new rule does not alter the reality that at least a single cartoon is required when necessary. Thus, filing an awarding without a drawing is enormously risky and should be avoided. A drawing is worth a thou words, if non more. If y'all try and add a cartoon after filing you will almost certainly be prevented from doing and then considering despite the fact that a cartoon is non required to get a filing date you still cannot add new matter afterwards you file a patent application. Adding drawings will ordinarily add material, which is absolutely prohibited. The Patent Office has cautioned applicants that it remains best practice to file with drawings.

Gene Quinn

Gene Quinn is a patent attorney and a leading commentator on patent law and innovation policy. Mr. Quinn has twice been named one of the top l most influential people in IP by Managing IP Magazine, in both 2022 and 2022. From 2022-2020, Mr. Quinn has also been recognized by IAM Magazine as i of the top 300 IP strategists in the world, and in 2022 he was recognized by IAM in their inaugural Strategy 300 Global Leaders listing.

Mr. Quinn founded IPWatchdog.com in 1999, and he is currently President & CEO of IPWatchdog, Inc. According to IAM Magazine, Mr. Quinn "has reshaped the IP debate in the United States in a fashion that has forced policy makers to carefully consider the macroeconomic effects of IP constabulary and its potential to bulldoze innovation and economic activity."

Regarded as an expert on software patentability and U.S. patent process, Mr. Quinn has advised inventors, entrepreneurs and start-upwardly businesses throughout the U.Due south. and around the world. He consults with attorneys facing peculiar procedural issues at the Patent Office, advises investors and executives on patent police force changes and pending litigation matters, and has represented patent practitioners earlier the Part of Enrollment & Discipline.

Mr. Quinn began his career as a litigator handling a diversity of ceremonious litigation matters, and he has been a patent chaser for nigh two decades. He has previously taught a diversity of intellectual holding courses at the law school level, teaching courses such as patent law, patent claim drafting, patent prosecution, copyright police, trademark law and introduction to intellectual property at Syracuse University Higher of Law, Temple University School of Law, The University of Toledo Higher of Law, the University of New Hampshire School of Law, the John Marshall Police force School (Chicago) and Whittier Law Schoolhouse. Since 2000 Mr. Quinn has likewise taught the leading patent bar review form in the nation.

Mr. Quinn is admitted to exercise law in New Hampshire, is a Registered Patent Attorney licensed to practice before the United states of america Patent Office and is also admitted to practice before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, manufactures and comments on IPWatchdog.com do not constitute legal communication, nor do they create any attorney-customer relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author as of the fourth dimension of publication and should not be attributed to the author's employer, clients or the sponsors of IPWatchdog.com. Read more.