Chemical and pharmaceutical companies protect their investment in research and development and the future of the firms by securing patents on their inventions. Patents enable you to resist competition. Success or failure of the company often depends on the strength of the patent as well as the longer the term of the patent, the greater will be its value. A Make My Invention Prototype is one that defines your invention broadly and but simultaneously builds in fallback narrow invention.
The United States Patent and Trademark Office receives thousands and thousands of patent applications every year. In reality, the Patent Office has proposed new patent rules to alleviate the Examiner workload. In accordance with one proposed rule, in case a patent application is rejected, to be able to present your case again, the patent applicant will likely be confined to filing one request for continued examination (or RCE). Considering the new rule, unless the patent applicant masters the complexities of patent law, the applicant might end up receiving a weak patent instead of a strong one.
Imagine you have filed a patent application where you have defined your invention broadly in addition to narrowly in ten succinct sentences in what are known as patent claims. These patent claims is going to be numbered 1 through 10. Typically claim 1 will represent the invention of the broadest scope, and also the higher numbered claims represent fallback narrow inventions. Within our hypothetical, claims 2 to 10 will refer back to claim 1. Thus, claim 2 refers back to claim 1. Claim 4 refers returning to claim 3, which refers back to claim 2. Claim 5 refers back to claim 1 or claim 4. In this particular example, say claim 5 refers to claim 1. Remember that the greater quantity of fallback claims you might have, you have a better chance of winning the lawsuit in case your competitor challenges your patent.
Now imagine that the Examiner rejects the patent, since it often happens, stating that this invention is not new or is only a minor modification of what is well known already. You, as patent applicant, have a chance to respond to the Examiner. You present arguments stating why the invention is completely new and not obvious and why you need to granted Inventhelp Inventor Stories. The Examiner rejects your argument. Now, to continue your effort to obtain a patent, you wish to present new arguments. To accomplish this, you might need to file an RCE (as well as the fee) together with the new arguments.
The Examiner takes it up again. This time around, the Examiner softens a bit and says, in a non-final rejection, that invention of claims 4 to 10 would be allowable as a patent if you rewrite claim 4 without having a reference to assert 1, but will continue to reject the broader invention of claims 1, 2, and three. Now you have a selection of taking what the Examiner gave you, that is certainly, claims 4 to 10 or alternatively, argue even more. You choose to argue. The Examiner finally rejected the application, repeating what he stated before, which is, claim 4 onwards would be allowable should you rewrite it as indicated before. Now, the choices you might have are extremely limited. It is possible to rewrite claim 4 since the Examiner indicated, as new claim 1, and acquire a patent with new claim 1. However, you are going to not be able to get yourself a patent with claims five to ten.
The Examiner would refuse to grant claim five to ten as he will claim that claim 5 has been changed in the scope even when you failed to modify the wording of the claim. The Examiner will debate that original claim 5 referred to original claim 1. Now, claim 5 refers returning to new claim 1, which is of a different scope. The Examiner would indicate that, because the scope of the claim is different, he would need to perform further search and examination on claims five to ten. He would state that the patent law would not allow him to accomplish this since iqpzlk rejection continues to be made final already. The only way to have the Examiner moving on this could be if you could file an RCE. However, you might have already consumed your RCE option. You can not file another RCE now, and therefore, you can not get claims 5-10. You will definitely get a patent with just one claim. If an infringer challenges your patent, and proves that your only claim is invalid, Inventhelp Store could be thrown out.
If you have rewritten claim 4 (as new claim 1) when responding to the non-final rejection, rather than when answering the last rejection as you did, patent law might have allowed the Examiner to handle further search on claims 5 to 10, and the chances of getting those claims would have been favorable. Should you have had fallback position of claims 5 to 10 also, you will use a greater probability of winning the truth.