[Marc Zuta electronics engineer]




Home



Click for Ivrit


The Science of Patenting



Scientific patenting, Patentics(SM) - when I managed a patent attorney office which I have founded , I invented a system for helping the patent attorney in drafting patent applications and during prosecuting these applications. The system takes from the realm of High Tech, based on my experience as an electronics engineer in High Tech Research and Design (R&D).

This is a new, innovative approach: At present, patent attorneys only use computers for typing patent applications and draft drawings, but the substantive work of planning the strategy and architecture of the patent application is a manual, labor-intensive process, performed in patent attorney's mind.
The patent attorney does this essential task alone, without any help.

A challenge in patent application drafting is to organize the application so that it takes into account the inventor's ideas (sometimes a bit confused) and the prior art- what is already known.
With inventions for simple devices, the challenge is that there are a multitude of similar prior art devices, so it may be difficult to distinguish your invention from all the existing devices.

On the other hand, many inventions in high tech are very complex, possibly described in lenghty patens, of hundreds or thousands of pages. How does the patent attorney compare all these existing patents with your invention- which may be voluminous as well?
Can someone do it, in a manual process, all in his mind?

In high tech, Mathematics offers a solution- Boolean Logic BL. With BL, your invention can be described in mathematical terms including elements of the invention and logic factors between them, such as AND, OR, NOR, XOR, NAND etc., even in complex formulas.

The great benefit of this approach, as detailed in Patentics(SM), is that Boolean formulas can be undersood by humans, AND can be processed in a computer as well. Thus, a computer using Patentics will give you a solution, taking into account ALL the requirements you have set before it as Boolean equations.

Humans are more intelligent and creative than computers, however computers beat humans in performing complex calculations, at high speed.
Another barrier is passing the examination. One has to devise persuasive arguments, sometimes creative answers.
So, achieving patent grant in a short time (one to two years from filing the application to patent grant) is not easy; I did it using Patentics.

Did this invention achieve success? On the one hand, it helped me draft patent applications that were well organized, with the description, drawings and claims supporting each other, to achieve synergy and to better pass the examination- don't forget that the examiner at the Patent Office is an expert in the particular field of your invention, a professional, in addition to his or her expertise in Patent Law and case.

The examiner may ask difficult questions during examination, and you (or more precisely, your patent application) should be ready with answers if you want a patent to be granted to you.

Another great success was the approval at the Nazareth District Court, to use Patentics in Court.
I was appointed consultant on patents to the Court- each side already had its patent attorney consultant.
I asked Court's permission to present my recommendations using Patentics, so the recommendations would be more clear and concise, and the Court approved (the honorable Shaher Atrash presiding).

Maybe in the future, based on the Court's decision, the Patent Office may adopt Patentics and demand of patent attorneys to use Patentics in drafting patent applications and during prosecution. This may improve the efficiency of the examination process.

I also presented Patentics to the US Patent Office USPTO. My recommendations are now presented at USPTO.

USPTO received proposals and recommendations from reputable experts:

American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO)
Japan Intellectual Property Association (JIPA)
National Association of Patent Practitioners (NAPP)
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
San Diego Intellectual Property Law Association (SDIPLA)
BIOCOM
Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO)
Eli Lilly and Company
Genentech, Inc.
GlaxoSmithKline
IBM Corporation
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA)
- and also from little me, Marc Zuta, paatent attorney from Israel.

On the other hand, I was preoccupied with other issues and couldn't prosecute my US patent application, so it was not granted a patent. You can see the published application here

Maybe law firms may use Patentics as well, if they want to present their case clearly and concisely. I read about cases where each side presented voluminous arguments, including thousands or tens of thousands of pages. Who will read all this? In this day and age, people don't write books of thousands of pages, rather they send twits of one or two sentences...






[מהנדס מרק זוטא]




[Patent attorney engineer]

This book is available at Amazon Store as an electronic book

The printed, paperback book at Amazon Store

_______________________________________

Disclaimer


This is not professional advice. Before doing anything, you should consult with professionals: Engineers, Accountant, Patent attorney, Lawyer, Sales and marketing experts, PR, Product design, Safety and standards consultants, etc.
You should learn as much as possible about the subject of your interest: from other sites on the Internet, as well as books, periodicals, products and services now offered on the market, etc.

_______________________________________

Marc Zuta, Electronics Engineer & Patent Attorney


P.O. Box 2162, Petah Tikva 4912003, ISRAEL
zutam@yahoo.com

_______________________________________

Copyright © 2010-2019 Marc Zuta.

No copyright is claimed in material from the Israel Patent Office or from other patent offices.
The moral right of the author has been asserted.

florida web design