TecEsq Intellectual Property Solutions

Patent Prosecution

Drafting a patent application is the first step to protect an invention. It requires an inventor to gather all information related to the invention and draft an application. Preparing patent claims and specifications require both technical and legal skills and are very difficult parts of drafting a patent application. The next step generally is to respond to Office Actions from Patents & Trademark Offices. TecEsq provides end-to-end solutions for patent prosecution.

Patent Application Drafting

Sample

Get Quote

Patent Application Drafting includes preparation of a patent application that can be filed with patent offices. A patent can enable an inventor to exclude others from using his invention and at the same time gain commercially from it. A patent requires an invention that is novel, non-obvious and has some utility. Drafting of patent includes preparing the claims, description, and drawings. Effort and budget required for drafting a patent application depends on the complexity of the invention, the type of patent application, i.e. provisional or non-provisional, etc.

Office Action Responses

Sample

Get Quote

Office Action response is drafted in response of the office action received from an examiner for a pending patent application. Drafting of the response includes understanding the invention, arguments of the examiners and the references cited by the examiner. The response is generally targeted towards the claimed matter and therefore may involve its amendment and addition/cancellation of claims. Effort and budget required for drafting a patent response depends on the complexity of the invention, the depth and breadth of examiners arguments, quality of the patent application, etc. The client attorneys need to spend only a fraction of their billing hours which results in huge cost savings for the client.

Sample	Close

Subject:*
Name:*
E-mail ID:*
Company :*
Phone No. :*
Message :

Get Quote	Close

Subject:*
Name:*
E-mail ID:*
Company :*
Phone No. :*
Message :

Select Case Studies	Close

Technology Landscaping \| Patent Application Drafting \| Office Action Response Drafting \| Invalidity Search \| Prior Art Search

Case Study I: Technology Landscaping Business Objective Perform patent landscaping for clients in the domain of HVAC and Automobiles. Challenge: Fortune 500 HVAC and automobile companies wanted to analyze patent landscape in specific technology domains to invest in R&D and patenting. The number of patents ran into thousands, while time and costs were critical. Process: Dedicated teams were set up with expertise or experience in these technologies Generated technology Taxonomy Searched and extracted patent data Analyzed and categorized patent data based on the taxonomy Analysis based on the categorized set to identify whitespace and technology trends Achievement: The deadlines and budget of the client was met. More importantly, the analysis was very helpful to the client. Case Study II: Patent Drafting Business Objective Draft patent application related to Computer Peripheral. Challenge: An inventor wanted to get a patent application drafted for filing in US. The inventor could not afford a US attorney and wanted the best quality at lowest cost. Process: Patent engineer was assigned to the inventor to understand her technology The inventor was guided on the patent requirements and best practices Developed understanding of the novelty and state-of-the-art technology Prepared claims and specifications Iterations on drafts were performed to include all possible information and achieve quality Achievement: The patent application was drafted within clients budget and bar date. More importantly, the quality of the application was as per the best US standards. Case Study III: Office Action Response Drafting Business Objective Prepare Office Action response for an invention related to Computer Peripherals. Challenge: A client wanted to draft a response to an office action for a patent application for which two Requests for Continued Examinations (RCE) have been filed. The invention was crucial for the business of the client. Process: A strategy for devised to prepare the response and was discussed with client The viewpoint and direction of the examiner was ascertained from previous actions Various options proposed to client including claim amendments and arguments OA response was prepared and filed Achievement: The client was made aware of all the options and strategies, which made it easier for the client to choose the path. The client got the best quality response with tremendous savings in costs. Case Study IV: Invalidity Search Business Objective Perform invalidity search in the domain of software technology for a top software company in the US. Challenge: To invalidate or find the most relevant prior art and assist clients in invalidating the patent /claim(s) in question before an important case discussion Process: • Prepared understanding of invention • Examined file wrapper • Performed inventor, assignee, product, classification and keyword searches • Search performed on Delphion, USPTO, IEEE, ACM, Google, Google Scholar, IBM Database, Source Forge, etc. • Conducted analysis of the results and prepared claim charts based on the most relevant references Achievements •Turn around time – as per the requirement (120 hrs.) of the client •Cost Benefit - Savings of $14,400 because of 80% lower charge rate than US counterpart Case Study V: Prior Art Search Business Objective To conduct a prior art search for a technology of a client in telecommunication domain. Challenge: To provide 8 to 10 most relevant "prior art" references and at a quick turnaround. Process: • Prepared understanding of invention • Performed Inventor, Assignee, Product, classification and keyword searches • Search was performed on Delphion, USPTO, IEEE, ACM and Google Achievements: •Turn around time – delivered in quick turnaround (10 hrs) •Cost Benefit - savings of $400 per Prior Art Search