STOP Patent Scams,
  Traps, and Mishaps  
Often by intentionally misrepresenting that there is a "Provisional Patent," and by exaggerating and contriving benefits as well as omitting or trivializing limitations of the Provisional Application. Be cautious.
.
.
.
.
Please overlook our temporary remodeling flaws. We are available for your patent, trademark, and other IP needs.
.
.
.

Mishap Examples

Mishap Examples
.
.
.
Mishaps Examples
Listed below are examples of mishaps or unintended consequences as a result of improper patent filing and protection, as well as disclosing more than was included and protected within the poorly prepared and filed patent application. Keep two things in mind.  (1) often these are attractive because of their low costs, fast filing, and “patent pending” “guarantee.”  It is not so much about how much is paid, but what quality results.  (2) Usually the examples concern Provisional “Patent” Applications.  Be mindful that patent law authorizes the provisional application and when completed properly can be a useful strategic tool.  The unfortunate they are rarely used correctly and are now large used as a marketing gimmick with little to no protective value..
 .
 .
 .
EXAMPLE ONE
First Mishap Indication – Hastily drawn and inadequate Provisional “Patent” Application.
Mishap Suffer – Inventor and company of the critical rock drilling bit angle.
.
The Scam
New Railhead Mfg., vs. Vermeer Mfg.
The plaintiff invented a new earth and rock drilling bit with the bit body “angled with respect to the sonde [attachment] housing.” The drill bit was offered for sale before the Provisional Application was filed, but not more than one year. A hastily drawn and inadequate Provisional “Patent” Application neglected to include and disclose the enabling critical drill bit angle.
Within the year, a thoughtful and complete Non-Provisional Patent Application included the critical angle of the invention was properly filed, but more than one year after the initiation of the sale. The non-provisional patent could not claim a priority date to the critical drill bit angle from the Provisional “Patent” Application because it was not included in the hastily written description.
The Non-Provisional Patent Application was therefore found invalid for the critical drill bit angle claim under the statute of “sales more than one year before filing” under section 35 U.S. code 102 (b).
.
Reality
♦ Mishap – The Provisional “Patent” Application only protects what is described in the application in an enabling manner that allows one of ordinary skill in the art to perform the invention. Hastily written and incomplete Provisional “Patent” Applications provide much less protection than most inventors realize.  Further, improvement to an invention not written in the Provisional “Patent” Application are not protected with the filing date.  Improvements can be added with later filing dates.  In this example an engineer exposed to the sale of the drill bit could file a patent application for other features taught before any subsequent filing by the original idea holder and limiting the scope of the intended patent.
.
.
.
EXAMPLE TWO
First Mishap Indication – Inventor who lost patent value.
Mishap Suffer – Inventor who lost patent value.
.
The Scam
“DO NOT Patent Without Professional Assistance”
An inventor files – October 11th, 2013 10:10 pm
“I am a Pro Se (for oneself) inventor.”  “I will warn do-it-your-sellers: I had to learn the hard way and lost rights that cost me a decent living worth of money…”
.
Reality
♦ Mishap – “I learned that even though I feel more comfortable with managing my cases through the PTO, I do it with a team of patent attorneys I pay to consult every move.”  “Find a way to save the money you need, use your taxes! take out a loan… DO NOT patent without professional assistance.”
.
.
.
EXAMPLE THREE
First Mishap Indication – Hastily drawn and inadequate Provisional “Patent” Application.
Mishap Suffer – Inventor and company of the critical rock drilling bit angle.
.
The Scam
“Patent Pending” Invention Marketing
An inventor files a Provisional “Patent” Application, secures “Patent Pending” status and has one year to market to potential licensees until a Non-Provisional permanent application must be filed or to abandon the invention. A patent is only as good as what it formally claims. Legally defined protection does not come so much from the application summary, background, abstract, description, drawing, and other descriptors. What is protected is that which is formally claimed as the intellectual property in the invention claims. A Provisional “Patent” Application may contain claims, but it is not required, and hence is usually not included as it adds time and cost to what is intended to be quick and inexpensive.
.
Realty
♦ Mishap – The danger with sharing an invention with an incomplete Provisional “Patent” Application is that most corporate developers will understand the invention within moments of seeing it, and will have largely reengineered it for their specific purposes before the end of the meeting. If the Provisional “Patent” Application has not formally claimed the boundaries of intellectual property then there is nothing to stop the corporation from legally using what was taught them, but was not claimed by the Provisional “Patent” Application. The corporation may have brought the inventor in knowing they would get ideas from an incomplete protected invention that they can then use. The likely result is a more informed corporation with new and largely unrestricted ideas and either no offer for license or a much diluted invention value license.
♦ Mishap – Invention marketing firms are often less interested in protecting the invention and are more interested in just getting to market. The money spent on a patent is just money now unavailable to them. There is nothing wrong with this thinking as long as the inventor is fully aware of it, and may agree with it. What is needed is adequately defined protection before exposure to the public. Only a proper Provisional “Patent” Application or Non-Provisional Patent Application can the leverage of the U.S. patent laws, rules, and traditions to protects, creates value, and equalizes negotiating power.
.
.
.
Could A Mishap Occur, It Depends!
Many other examples could follow and other examples are listed elsewhere. Remember there is nothing wrong with any of the above actions and there may be no mishap, if a patent application,”patent pending” status, or patent of “useless” or questionable protective strength is suitable. In all sincerity, it depends upon the purpose and business strategy. Maybe an inventor just want to go to market with a “patent pending” status and harvest the low hanging fruit, and have no intention on defending your invention. On the other hand if there is a plan on defending, licensing, or selling your invention then ensuring more protective patent rights is imperative.  Fortress PATENTS / IP or other patent preparers held to trusted legal ethical standards, rather than a marketer’s situational standard, can help with any personal and business patent and intellectual property strategy. 

Mishap Examples 

Mishap Examples  |  Home   |  www.FortressPATENTS.com
Mishap Examples
Mishap Examples