A post from our student blogger Sarah Goodman

The latest blog emphasized the importance of incorporating alternatives and variations when drafting patent applications. The purpose of this practice is to produce a higher quality patent application and protect a client against competitors. An additional technique to strengthen a patent is the use of examples. Examples in a patent application are specific embodiments of the invention. Inclusion of examples is not always required by a patent examiner. However, it is good practice to describe different embodiments of the invention especially in the unpredictable scientific fields like chemistry and genetics.

An example is a detailed description of an embodiment of the invention. Examples may include a description of how to make the invention, how to use the invention, and specific details of an embodiment. Specific details such as the temperature at which a reaction was run or compositions from which a product was manufactured can assist in demonstrating enablement of the invention. Increasing the number of examples often broadens the scope of the claims by distinctly pointing out different features of the invention.

There are two types of invention embodiments that can be included in a patent application: prophetic examples and working examples. According to MPEP 2164.02, a working example is based on an experiment that was actually performed. A working example may include testing conditions, usability conditions, specific compositions, and experimental results. A prophetic example is based on predicted results when the experimental work was not yet actually conducted. Prophetic examples may include simulated test results, calculations, and theoretical experiments.

There is a correlation between the need for working examples and the complexity and unpredictability of the field of the invention. Descriptions of example embodiments may be the best way to demonstrate the utility and function of some inventions. Including examples in a patent application can be very helpful in fulfilling the requirements set forth in the MPEP for enablement under 35 U.S.C §112(1). In our MSPL program, we are currently drafting the examples for the patent application portion of our capstone projects.

A post from our student blogger Sarah Goodman

In the MSPL classes, we learn that well-drafted patent applications should contain the widest breath possible and appropriate to best protect the client against competitors. When more attention to detail is paid by the patent drafter, more coverage can be granted to the patent applicant. The claims should be written to cover more than just the minimal features of an invention. A good technique is the incorporation of alternatives and variation.

Alternatives are different methods of accomplishing a task. Alternatives can include additional ways an invention can be utilized. Variation is the addition of different configurations, materials, and compositions. Alternatives and variations can be added by the patent drafter which requires creativity and research into the technical field. At least one actual embodiment of the invention must be included in the patent application, but describing the invention usually involves a lot more than just describing one embodiment. Any possible alternatives and variations should be included when preparing and filing patent applications to reduce the ability for competitors to design around the claims.

Variations should be listed even if not the best mode of practicing the invention. If variations are not included in a patent, a competitor company could sell cheaper inferior products without infringing by using the less optimal materials. Variations should include everything that could reasonably work. Another reason to list alternatives and variations is to allow the patent owner to continue improving the invention. If alternatives are not listed that later are discovered by a competing company to be an improvement, that company could obtain competitive patents which block the innovation of the original patent owner.

Listing variations and alternatives is a much cheaper and simpler method of providing broad coverage for an invention than filing more patent applications. The difficulty and expense to list alternatives and variations is minimal when compared to the cost and amount of effort necessary to file additional patents on modifications of one basic idea.

By writing a nonprovisional patent application as our capstone project in the MSPL program, we learn how to use alternatives and variations to increase the broadness and enforceability of a patent application. A broad patent is more valuable to the patent owner and potential licensees. It is the responsibility of the patent drafter to provide a quality patent application.

A post from our student blogger Sarah Goodman

I recently interviewed Catherine (Shu) Zhang, a current MSPL student, about her capstone thesis project.

1. 1. In general terms, what is your capstone project about?

My capstone project is about using a novel chemical reaction to find a treatment option for Niemann-Pick Type C disease. The resulting treatment option may have broader applications in alleviating illness caused by cholesterol build-up. Niemann-Pick Type C disease is a severe illness, and there are a lot of research efforts at the University of Notre Dame focusing on this disease.

2. What have you completed so far on your capstone project?

I have completed a synopsis of the project and drafted a set of potential claims. I also performed a patentability search covering domestic and international patents and patent applications. I researched a wide range of non-patent literature which broadened my technical perspective regarding chemistry and pharmacology. I will present all of this information in my technical presentation in December.

3.  What have you learned this semester through working on this project?

I learned more about lysosomal storage diseases like Niemann-Pick Type C disease and other categories of disease related to cholesterol trafficking. Having a capstone project with an actual invention gives me a real world experience of how a patent application is prepared before I enter the workforce.

4. What major challenges did you face? How did you solve them?

The most difficult challenge for me was learning new complicated scientific material quickly in a new field. I handled this challenge by reading a lot of scientific literature in the field. I also researched published patents to study the proper form of a chemical patent.

5. How has your project prepared you for a career as a patent agent?

My capstone project has prepared me in two major ways. The first is that I have learned how to communicate effectively with an inventor to get an accurate understanding of an invention. I also have broadened my technical field by learning the chemical background of a technology.

6. Which of your abilities do you think have helped you succeed with your project?

My persistence has been an important quality when researching different technologies as well as my interest in the science field. My writing ability has also been crucial for rephrasing complex chemical procedures into legal terms for IP protection.

7. What are your career plans for the future?

I think that obtaining a Master of Science in Patent Law from the University of Notre Dame will open many doors for my future career. I am currently considering the career options of a patent agent at a technology transfer office or a law firm.

A post from our student blogger Sarah Goodman

In the MSPL program at the University of Notre Dame I learned that there are three different types of patents granted by the USPTO.

A utility patent is issued for a new and useful invention or improvement to an existing invention. An invention qualifying for a utility patent must be a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. A granted utility patent gives the owner the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the invention for up to twenty years with the payment of maintenance fees. This is the most common type of patent issued by the USPTO.

A design patent is issued for a new, original, and ornamental design. This design must be used for an article of manufacture. A design is inseparable from the article of manufacture and cannot exist alone. A granted design patent gives the owner the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the design for fourteen years with no maintenance fees required. Both a utility and a design patent may be obtained if the invented article possesses functional utility as well as an inventive ornamental design.

A plant patent is issued for a new and distinct asexually reproduced plant. This plant can be either invented or discovered and includes mutants, hybrids, and new seedlings not found in nature. If a natural plant mutant is discovered, it must have been discovered in a cultivated area to qualify for a plant patent. The USPTO considers algae and macro fungi eligible for plant patents. A granted plant patent gives the owner the right to exclude others from making, using, or selling the plant for up to twenty years with no maintenance fees required. A utility patent application can be additionally filed having claims to a plant and plant components including seeds and genes. Inventors who develop reproducing plants such as corn and wheat tend to file an additional utility patent application which may be granted if the plant fulfills the useful, novel, and nonobvious requirements.

For our capstone projects, we are learning how to write a utility patent for an invention disclosure from a Notre Dame faculty member.

A post from our student blogger Sarah Goodman

During the orientation Boot Camp, the MSPL class had the opportunity to learn from three different speakers in the patent law field. The first guest, Dr. Art Moss, is a Sr. Patent Associate at DuPont. He gave a full-day presentation, “Patent Law for Researchers,” to the MSPL class and some members of the Notre Dame community at Innovation Park. Dr. Moss explained the different parts of a patent and techniques for writing a patent application. He also gave an introduction to the United States Code Title 35, which addresses the patentability of inventions.

Our second speaker was Dr. David Burns, a patent agent and employee of Qualcomm Incorporated. Qualcomm is a California-based corporation that is a leading patent licensor of wireless technology and innovation. Dr. Burns lectured to our class for three days. Some highlights included an extensive introduction to conducting inventor interviews and working with invention disclosure forms. We also learned more about the Code of Federal Regulations Title 37 which contains the rules concerning the format and filing of patent applications. As one of the most efficient patent writers in his field, he gave our class tips on drafting patents and creating invention illustrations.

We met the final guest speaker of the Boot Camp on a tour of the Union Station Technology Center in South Bend. The facility is a state-of-the-art technology center which offers computing space and power services while operating fiber optic networks for the Midwest. Dr. Shane Fimbel, chief operating officer of Union Station, gave us a presentation about the history and function of this data center as well as a tour of the facilities. He emphasized the essential role of innovation and creativity in the success of this business.