This website contains information related to the Intellectual Property world, and, specifically, to the world of PATENTS. The material contained in this website has been collected by the webmaster and is entirely the responsibility of SiberKhem Company of Arlington, VA, USA. It is intended to provide information to individuals at all levels of involvement in the field of patents, particularly, patent searching and application writing. Such individuals include inventors, patent agents, patent examiners, patent attorneys, judges, jurors and all lay persons interested in learning about PATENTS.
However, the impact of the first two phases in the overall process of obtaining a patent, i.e., PATENT SEARCHING and APPLICATION WRITING, are so highly important, that it directly affects the quality of the "life" of a patent document throughout all of its subsequent phases, including prosecution and litigation; in other words, the successful survival of a patent document throughout its life, in the face of court challenges (e.g., U.S. Federal Circuit Courts or District Courts) can be expressed as the RELIABILITY of a patent, which is an empirical probabilitistic expression of its relationship to all other existing patents at the time of filing, as well as to all other existing and accessible recorded technical knowledge, and to the cummulative probabilities of its "survival" in the various phases of the process. And the "network" that relates all patent documents to each other and, more broadly, to all technical knowledge in general, is the Patent Classification System, a complex taxonomic and ontological system that provides a framework of relationships among linguistic categories (i.e., linguistic corpora for technical subject domains), which have been devised by various Official patenting bodies, particularly those of the US Patent and Trademark Office (USCS), the European Patent Office (ECLA), the Japanese Patent Office (JPOCS) and the World Intellectual Property Organization/WIPO (IPC).
It is most important that anyone who is a professional member of the IP-Patent community, fully recognizes that the purpose of any Patent Classification system is to ensure the "disambiguation" (i.e., a new term used in internet circles to denote the avoidance of ambiguity in coding, etc.) of terminology used in general technical knowledge and the accurate and usable relationship structure among technical concepts and inventions, particularly the information that is disclosed in patent documents. Ambiguity in a patent document can result in the involvement of the courts (i.e., "cease-and-desist" orders, injunctions, litigation, etc.), where judges and jurors deciding a patent matter may not necessarily be competant in either or both the detailed legal and/or the technical aspects of the patent issues presented before them. And the resolution of patent issues in the courts is often based on insufficient evidence.
Regarding "insufficient evidence", I am specifically referring to relevant "prior art" in the form of patent documents and other technical documents (such as uncovered in a patent search) that are presented in any court proceedings to establish the ultimate validity of a patent and/or its "true" metes and bounds. A patent/technical search uncovers this technical evidence in a logical, objective manner, thereby reducing or eliminating the need for the opinions of technical "experts". Thus, rather than having litigation attorneys try to figure out the scope of active patent claims or deciding whether a "more thorough" patent search is needed, the farsighted patent application writer will ensure that a thorough patent search has been performed, and write a clear application that sets forth the metes and bounds of the claimed invention in words that won't confuse judges or juries. Also, when the background portion of a patent application contains sufficient information, it can possibly decrease the total time of prosecution by providing a useful "guide" for the examiner in making their determination of patentability. I can say that this was true in my case, during my years as a patent examiner at the USPTO.
Note that any information provided in this website is not in any way intended to substitute for legal advise provided by competant legal council, such as a Patent Agent or a Patent Attorney for the jurisdiction of the reader. All information in this website is provided with the most accurate references and citations of the relevant sources as possible, including classification schedules and other classification documents, patent documents, Official websites, CFR, U.S.C, and various pertinent manuals and articles from sources such as Law schools, trade journals, etc. This website does, however, emphasize the critical importance of a proper and thorough patent search and corresponding proper and thorough patent application in the early phases of the life of a patent document; therefore, this website attempts to provide a detailed explanation of the methodology involved in navigating the accessible patent databases (regardless of language) to obtain relevant results in a reasonable amount of time, corresponding to a given technical concept, and the use of the patent search results in the preparation of a patent application that accurately describes that concept.
In addition, it is even more important for those who use the patent databases, to know that the databases do evolve, somewhat. For example, in the US, patents can be withdrawn. This results in the patent document being unavailable in the uspto.gov site, but it can often still be accessed in ep.espacenet.com. Therefore, the question of availability can become an issue, obviously furthering the confusion of patent process details. Also, the patent can include "Certificates of Correction", which can change names of inventors, words in the written specification, etc. More often, though, it is only the current classification that changes, especially when they are part of a Reclassification Project.