How Do You Know if Your Infringing on a Patent

Owning a U.S. patent gives y'all important rights over your product, technology, or a big idea — nosotros'll call this your invention. Patent infringement occurs when some individual or entity infringes on your intellectual property rights over your invention. That is when someone enters the 'prohibited territory' defined by your patent.

How Is Patent Infringement Determined?

How patent infringement is adamant can be a complicated process and tin involve a lengthy legal proceeding. This article will provide an overview of patent infringement and the key elements in determining whether infringement has actually occurred.

Patent Rights Generally

A U.South. patent gives patent holders the legal intellectual property right to exclude others from making, using, selling, or importing any is inside the scope of the patent. The United states Patent and Trademark is the administering authorities body in the United States that grants patent blessing for inventions.

Patent owners tin can be the sole legal source of the patent invention and utilise or sell the invention past themselves. Patent owners tin also license the rights to the applicative patent to others. Finally, a patent owner can sell or transfer the applicable patent rights as a type of intellectual property asset.

Patent Infringement By and large

In general terms, patent infringement is when someone carries out an deed that infringes on a patent owner's legal intellectual holding right without the permission of the patent holder. An individual or entity will typically infringe the patent by making, using, selling, or importing whatever is inside the scope of the patent without the patent owner'due south direct permission to do so. The U.s. Patent Office does not determine or enforce infringement. Patent Infringement is determined and enforced past U.S. federal courts.

Types of Patent Infringement

There are two main types of patent infringement, with 2 subtypes of patent infringement. This provides a patent holder with numerous means to bring a legal claim for patent infringement in federal or state court.

The four types of patent infringement are:

1. Direct infringement;
2. Indirect infringement;
3. Induced infringement; and
4. Contributory infringement.

Direct Infringement

Direct infringement is defined past 35 U.S.C. § 271 of the U.Due south. patent law and essentially occurs when an individual or entity actively engages in a prohibited use of someone else's patented holding.

Prohibited uses including making, selling, or importing to sell an invention within the United States. For case, if someone is developing and selling a computer production that is identical to yours, this would be direct patent infringement with an infringing production.

Indirect Infringement

Indirect infringement of a patent, on the other manus, is found when an individual or entity causes or assists another private or entity is infringing on patented belongings. This indirect infringement must borrow on at least 1 material aspect of the patent claim.

Within indirect infringement, in that location are ii subtypes of indirect patent infringement:

1. induced infringement; and
2. contributory infringement.

Induced Infringement

Inducing infringement occurs when an private or entity actively induces another person or entity to make prohibited utilize of someone else'south patent. As an example, if an entity actively emails the ingredient list for a specific patented recipe to another entity, this would be induced infringement.

Contributory Infringement

Contributory infringement occurs when a person or entity knowingly provides a product or component of a product or service that helps the recipient directly infringe on a patent.  Also, the provided production or component must not have a substantial not-infringing use.

Basically, a person or entity must:

1. Know of the patent; and
2. Know that his or her actions would lead to infringement of the patent.

A substantial non-infringing use of a patent is use that is not unusual, farfetched, illusory, occasional, or experimental.

Where to Bring a Patent Infringement Claim

Under Usa law, patent holders tin bring a patent infringement claim against alleged infringers for infringing use. Patent infringement actions arise under federal law, and thus the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction.  But certain patent issues can exist brought in state court. For example, a dispute regarding the ownership of a patent or over a licensing agreement arise under property law or contract law, which are both by and large dictated by state law.

It is a expert idea to consult a patent chaser to sympathise your intellectual property rights for the applicable states likewise as your rights under federal law to determine which venue is better suited for your specific infringement lawsuit.

Elements of a Patent Infringement Claim

Under federal constabulary, in that location are two main elements of a patent infringement claim:

1. Ownership of a valid patent; and
2. Infringement of the patent by the accused.

These 2 main patent infringement elements have diverse components that make upward the larger chemical element, which we'll explore below.

Patent Ownership and Validity

Before yous can proceed with the remainder of your patent infringement merits, y'all must bear witness that you own a valid patent. This breaks down into two parts: ownership and validity.

Patent ownership typically is proven based on written documentation of ownership assigning the patent to you. This oft is the official documentation provided by the United States Patent and Trademark Office when it approves the patent. However, this documentation could also be a contract assigning to you the buying rights of a patent.

The validity of the patent must too be proven every bit an initial element of a patent infringement claim. An issued patent, even so, is presumed valid – shifting the burden to the accused to bear witness invalidity. Fifty-fifty if a patent has been issued for an invention, the validity of that patent tin withal exist called into question.

Courts can decide that a patent is invalid for a number of dissimilar reasons such every bit:

• Withheld information on a patent application;
• Faux information on a patent application;
• A claim within the patent is determined to be obvious;
• The description and/or the claims were unclear and ambiguous

Infringement of the Patent

To succeed on a patent infringement claim, a patent holder must next bear witness infringing use that infringes on the patent. Infringement tin can be broken down into iii sub elements:

1. the identity of the infringer;
2. the specific act of infringement; and
3. the similarity to one or more patent claims.

Identity of the Infringer

A patent infringement action would typically name as a accused every alleged patent infringer. This may be a particularly easy process if in that location is simply one specific individual who has infringed on your patent. It tin go much more than complicated, withal, when there are multiple individuals and businesses involved.

It could exist that multiple organizations were involved with building and selling the infringing invention in a collaborative process. If this is the case, and so each and every arrangement needs to exist named in your patent infringement complaint.

Don't worry if yous don't know the names and identities of each and every infringing private or entity before y'all bring your patent infringement lawsuit. You will have the opportunity to improve your complaint several times in the litigation process to proper name additional parties as you larn more information.

The formal process of discovery will likely provide you with key show from the other side that will aid you lot to place these additional parties. Moreover, the accused is often required by the court processes to identify other parties who are potentially relevant to your claim.

Specific Human action of Infringement

A patent holder bringing a patent infringement lawsuit will demand to identify a specific act of infringement carried out by the infringing political party. Every bit addressed to a higher place, patent infringement is the making, using, selling, or offering to sell a patented invention. This is what will demand to be proven. Typically, one or more distinct act past the alleged infringer must exist established to run across this requirement.

The all-time evidence for proving infringement will be the physical evidence of the competing invention. In this way, the defendant product can exist compared side to side to the patented invention. If yous take an indirect infringement claim, then you will ideally accept some documentary evidence of directing or assisting in the infringement, perhaps in emails or messages.

Similarity to One or More Patent Claims

Finally, this sub element addresses the specific claims that make upwards the patent. To bear witness patent infringement, a patent holder must demonstrate infringement of a specific patent claim by the accused production. Patents are made up of at least one, but often various "claims" that together make up the patented invention.

The infringing product must borrow on at least 1 of these claims every bit listed in the patent approved past the Patent Office. How claims are constructed by the court is explained in further detail below.

Claims Construction Generally

As noted to a higher place, one key element in proving patent infringement is proving that a specific patent claim listed in the validly issued patent has been infringed on past the infringing production at upshot. To infringe a claim, the alleged infringer must meet each and every element in it.

Claims construction is the process by which a court or other tribunal determines the scope and meaning of a patent'southward claims. It is only by properly interpreting and defining the scope and meaning of a patent merits can a fact finder then determine whether a patent has been infringed.

Therefore, this is done before a fact finder determines whether the accused production is in fact an infringing product.

Significant fiscal and time resources are ofttimes spent on the claims construction process and analysis. This is because patent infringement claims very often hinge on the interpretation of a patent claim'due south telescopic.

This means both sides of a patent infringement lawsuit will spend considerable time and resource in preparing for the court'due south claim construction estimation. The claims structure dispute often makes or breaks a patent infringement claim.

Because patent infringement and validity depend on the determination of the proper patent claim scope, both patent owners and alleged infringers typically expend significant resources addressing claim construction.

In most patent infringement lawsuits, the parties focus on one or more claim terms and assign dissimilar meanings to the terms to support their respective positions. Typically the parties have significant disputes concerning the advisable claim structure because frequently the claim structure ruling volition eliminate the relevance of a claim, in which case no infringement would have occurred.

Who Construes Claims Structure

The claims construction analysis for patent infringement lawsuits is considered a legal issue as opposed to a factual issue. In fact, the United states of america Supreme Courtroom specifically decided inMarkman v. Westview Instruments Inc. ,517 U.S. 370 (1996), that merits construction is a question of law reserved for the court and not a question of fact left to the fact finder. What this means is that the construction of a patent's claims is determined by a courtroom, not by a fact finder (due east.chiliad., by a jury at trial).

Typically claims constructions are carried out by a federal courtroom, as most patent lawsuits are brought in federal courtroom. However, claims construction is too completed past the International Merchandise Commission (ITC) in specialized and specifically applicable proceedings regarding the importation of allegedly infringing goods.

When Claims Construction Takes Place

Because a court conducts claims structure rather than a fact finder, the claims construction assay can be done before trial at summary judgment if not earlier in the legal proceeding. In fact, a court must construct the patent claims earlier a fact finder tin evaluate those construed claims confronting the allegedly infringing invention.

Therefore, claims construction is typically done under a separate hearing that is referred to as a "Markman hearing." This hearing is named after the landmark Supreme Courtroom case noted above.

These Markman hearings are pre-trial hearings held in federal district court in which the courtroom examines evidence from all parties in the instance about the appropriate meanings of the relevant keywords that are used in a patent claim.

Evidence Review at Claims Construction Hearings

The Federal Circuit has established specific requirements for these claims construction hearings, or Markman hearings, and the blazon of bear witness that tin can and should exist reviewed at the hearing.

The Federal Circuit is the appeals court that handles all appeals related to specific areas of federal law, including patents. In the court system, they are 1 level below the Supreme Court and tin set the standards that must be applied to patent law claims in all federal district courts inside every state.

In the Federal Excursion court examplePhillips v. AWH Corp., the Federal Circuit concluded that proper claim construction requires a review of the patent's intrinsic prove and — just when appropriate — a review of the extrinsic testify related to the patent.

Why Prove Is Reviewed

Intrinsic bear witness, and sometimes extrinsic evidence, is reviewed for a few reasons.

Intrinsic prove helps the court requite the specific patent claim the meaning that it would accept to a person of ordinary skill in the applicable field at the time the invention was established.  This person of ordinary skill in the applicable field is a standard used by the court arrangement.

The person of ordinary skill can be defined as a fictional, objective person who has the average knowledge, skill and expertise in the specific technical or scientific field of the claimed invention.

In addition, a review of intrinsic evidence helps courts to interpret the claims to cover what was actually invented by the patent holder and what the patent holder actually intended the patent to embrace.

Finally, intrinsic evidence is reviewed past courts to help preserve a patent merits'due south validity except where that would conflict with the claim's language and corresponding specification. This is because, in federal court, patents are presumed valid.

Intrinsic Evidence

The Federal Circuit has determined in example law that intrinsic evidence is the first place that a court should look to when conducting its claim assay. If a court can analyze the merits based on the intrinsic evidence, then the court should stop its research and should not review whatsoever outside, extrinsic evidence.

At that place are three types of intrinsic show used by the courts in evaluating claims construction:

• The patent'southward claims;
• The patent'south specification;
• The patent'south prosecution history.

Intrinsic bear witness is also referred to as the "public record" of the patent. These three elements make upward the public record of a patent because these are all available to the public via patent searching within the U.s. Patent and Trademark Office database.

Patent Claims

Patent claims define the scope and boundaries of the patented invention. One way to recollect of patent claims is equally a legal clarification of a specific plot of land that will explicate and help determine the telescopic of which land buying. In other words, the general purpose of patent claims is to state the legal boundaries of a patent.

Interestingly, the purpose of a patent merits is not necessary to explain an applicable applied science or how a specific production operates but to state the legal boundaries of the patent grant. Patent claims must dribble the necessary and specific and also distinguish itself from the prior fine art that is applicable.

Context is key in interpreting patent claims. Terms within patent claims are mostly given their ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a "person of ordinary skill" in the applicable field. Terms used in patent claims are interpreted according to the context in which the specific term appears in the merits.

So, if a patent applicant uses different terms to address and establish similar merits explanations or limitations, then these terms will be interpreted to have different meanings. This means some terms within a claim may have a different meaning than the term'south ordinary and customary pregnant.

Claims are also considered based on the place inside the patent claim that the term appears. At that place are three parts of a patent merits:

1. Preamble:
   1. This is the initial department of a patent claim that identifies the type of invention the claim relates to and whatsoever potential limits on the claim in particular circumstances.
2. Transitional Phrase:
   1. This is a transitional phrase placed after the preamble that either limits or does non limit the claim to the specific limitations that are thereafter listed within the claim.
      1. "Comprising" is the typical phrase used to non limit the claim to the limitations that may follow.
      2. "Consisting of" is the typical phrase used to limit the claim to the limitations that may follow.
3. Body:
   1. In that location are one or more limitations listed in the body of the claim.
   2. Limitations are selected elements or steps implementing an invention.

Based on the applicable case law, courts typically adhere different meanings and scopes to the dissimilar words or phrases that are used in dissever claims inside the same patent. This doctrine to apply different meanings and scopes to different words or phrases is simply a legal presumption.

Therefore, this presumption that different terms have different meanings can be overcome by the contents of the patent claim'due south specification and prosecution history.

Specifications

Specifications, in turn, teach about the underlying claims inside the patent. The specification's description can human activity as a lexicon for the patent claims in that it can help to explain in more of a narrative way the underlying invention. The specification can also more robustly explain and define terms equally they are used in the claims.

Considering of their function in teaching almost the underlying patent, specifications can exist peculiarly pertinent and important in a court's claim construction analysis. In fact, when a proposed construction of a claim nigh naturally aligns with the description of the invention in the specification, it will typically be dispositive in constructing that claim.

Specifications tin can be dispositive when they describe an invention's preferred or sole invention embodiment or if specifically excludes an invention'southward embodiment. Specifications too shed lite on claim constructions where they distinguish prior art and explain how the patent differs from applicative prior art.

However, specifications as well should not be used to take claims constructions to their extreme. The specific language of the claims is notwithstanding highly relevant and important in the claims construction analysis. There can be a fine line between reading a claim as more fully explained by the patent's specification, and reading a limitation into the claim from the patent'due south specification.

It is important to notation that a patent owner tin define specific terms within the patent's claims. These definitions tin differ from the ordinary meaning typically given to that specific term. If a patent drafter chooses to define terms within the patent, the definitions are often gear up out in the specification.

Overall, courts look to a patent's specification to make up one's mind the meaning of a term inside a claim as it is used past the inventor within the context of the invention in its entirety.

Prosecution History

The third element of a patent's intrinsic evidence is the patent'south prosecution history. The prosecution history of a patent is just the entire history from the time a patent application was submitted to the United States Patent and Trademark Office to when patent approval is granted. Patent applications are assigned to a specific patent examiner within the Patent Office.

This patent examiner conducts a comprehensive review of the patent and its claims, and reviews related prior fine art at length. Patent examiners issue Role Actions, which are communications to the patent bidder setting forth diverse questions or statements that a patent applicant tin can and then submit responses to.

This prosecution history can often show significant back and forth communications between the patent examiner and the patent applicant. This paper trail often provides helpful information that sheds lite on the proper estimation of a claim'due south overall telescopic.

For example, if a patent examiner asks whether a specific mechanism is contained within the scope of a specific patent claim, and the patent applicant writes a response letter indicating the mechanism is non included in the patent claim, this estimation volition be helpful in afterwards interpretation of whether or not a claim encompasses that mechanism.

Notably, of course, the disclaimer language of a subject affair or estimation must be articulate and unambiguous inside the prosecution history for the history interpretation to command.

Prosecution history will vary in its helpfulness depending on how much discussion occurred between the patent applicant and the patent examiner. When a patent is quickly approved, there volition be less of a prosecution tape, and thus would exist less helpful. In general, prosecution history is oftentimes less helpful than other elements of intrinsic evidence, especially the specification.

This is because prosecution history is not e'er articulate and is ofttimes a reflection of the negotiation that occurs betwixt a patent examiner and a patent applicant.

Extrinsic Evidence

Extrinsic evidence in merits construction analysis is relevant information outside of the intrinsic evidence that assists in analyzing a patent claim. Extrinsic evidence is simply used if the pregnant of a claim and its applicable limitations are non credible from the intrinsic evidence.

If this is the instance, then a court looks to extrinsic bear witness to try and resolve whatever lack of clarity in a merits and its respective terms.

Example law suggests that relying on extrinsic evidence should only exist used in rare instances.  In general, extrinsic evidence should only be used in very rare circumstances to assistance the courtroom in interpreting patent claims when information technology cannot do and so otherwise.

So, for example, if intrinsic evidence considered as a whole does not let a court to fully interpret a term of art used in a patent claim, then extrinsic show may be used to shed light on that specific term.

Extrinsic evidence is typically evidence such as:

• Skilful testimony;
• Pertinent treatises;
• Applicative journals;
• Dictionary definitions.

Treatises and dictionaries are given greater weight by the courtroom than other extrinsic evidence. This is because expert testimony can be more easily tailored to align with the plaintiff or accused'south side of the argument.

Expert testimony can also be used in particular circumstances. Typically, practiced testimony is used to:

• Explain how an invention works;
• Establish a specific term within the patent;
• Provide background explanations of the applicable engineering science; or
• Align an interpretation of a patent's technical components with the ordinary meaning of a term used by a person of ordinary skill in the applicable field.

Courts utilise extrinsic evidence to understand:

• Underlying significant of technical terms;
• Relevant scientific principles and applications;
• Current advancements and environment in the applicable field.

Claims Construction Hearings

Considering a courtroom's construction of a claim is so important to the outcome of a patent infringement lawsuit, claim structure hearings are a very of import part of a patent infringement claim. As noted above, a courtroom construes patent claims in a specific hearing called a Markman hearing.

A courtroom will frequently institute the date for a Markman hearing during what is chosen a Dominion 16 conference. A Rule 16 briefing is typically held once both sides have filed their complaints and corresponding reply or another responsive pleading. At a Rule sixteen briefing, a courtroom will require that the parties identify:

• the pertinent claim terms that will need structure;
• The proposed initial construction of applicable terms; and
• The areas of the alleged infringement.

Markman hearings tin be conducted at whatsoever bespeak during the litigation process, as at that place is no specific rule setting a time limit within the litigation that a Markman hearing needs to have identify. That means a Markman hearing can be conducted before, during, or afterwards discovery has airtight. It can even take place during a trial. Typically, however, a Markman hearing will take place before trial.

Markman hearings are often set apart in two parts. Start, a Markman hearing acts as a tutorial to instruct the guess on the underlying scientific groundwork of the patent and its corresponding claims. Each court will take different requirements for a Markman hearing. Some courts want a joint tutorial while others allow for each side to nowadays their own tutorial.

Markman hearings also consist of oral testimony and argument. This often includes live testimony of witnesses, often expert witnesses, on the witness stand.

Information technology is important to properly gear up for a Markman hearing.  You should get well acquainted with the intrinsic evidence of your underlying patent. Moreover, y'all must exist able to present complex scientific information to the courtroom so that the court understands the applicable scientific area applicable to your patent.

These presentations at a Markman hearing are often presentations that explain the applicable scientific issues at hand in a manner and means that is understandable. Parties also often used physical presentation boards to convey data to the court.

Fact Finder Determines Infringement

Later on a court has constructed the applicable claims in a patent infringement lawsuit, the fact finder must and then determine whether or non the defendant product is in fact an infringing production based on the applicable patent claims. This is typically done in the context of a jury trial.

Proficient testimony is typically presented on both sides to discuss the competing inventions and present arguments as to why the accused product infringes or does non infringe on the applicable patent.

Documentary evidence, typically in the forms of diagrams, charts, journals, emails, and the like, to further demonstrate similarities and differences betwixt the accused product and the patented ane.

Ultimately, after the testify is presented, the factfinder will make a determination about whether or non the competing invention has infringed on the patented invention.

Defenses to Patent Infringement

As part of the process of presenting information to the fact finder on infringement, the defendant will often put on a defense to contend that its invention is not in fact infringing on the applicative patent. At that place are multiple patent infringement defenses, including:

• There is no actual infringement;
• The applicable patent is invalid;
• The applicable patent is unenforceable.

Fact finders, i.east., a jury, must find that a patent claim has been infringed. Therefore, in interpreting whether in that location has been infringement, the facts must be construed to establish if the patent claims have been infringed by the accused production.

Doctrine of Equivalents

The doctrine of equivalents is a legal doctrine that tin come into play in patent infringement lawsuits.  The doctrine of equivalents allows for a finding of patent infringement for a patented invention even if an infringing invention does non fall within the literal telescopic of the infringed invention, but is nevertheless equivalent to the infringed invention.

To use the doctrine of equivalents, the competing invention must:

1. Perform substantially the same part every bit the infringed invention;
2. In substantially the same way;
3. To achieve the same result.

The doctrine of equivalents also tin can utilise when specific elements of the accused product or invention are interchangeable with the patented one, and a person with ordinary skill in the applicable field would take known that these elements were interchangeable when and then infringement occurred.

Limitation of the Doctrine Of Equivalents

In that location are limitations to the legal doctrine of equivalents. This doctrine must exist applied to the private elements of a patent claim rather than to the patent as a whole. Therefore, the doctrine does non come into play until afterwards the claims construction analysis has occurred.

The patent holder must show that the infringing claim was non foreseeable to someone of ordinary skill in the same field.  This foreseeability element is interpreted broadly by the court.  Courts have found that an equivalent is foreseeable if someone in the field would have known the equivalent existed, even if the suitability of that equivalent every bit an alternative was unknown.

In that location is some other limitation to the doctrine of equivalents. If a patent discloses an culling way to create the invention but does not specifically claim this way inside the patent merits, then this alternative style is non covered past the patent's protection.

This culling way tin can therefore be used freely by the public. This is why information technology tin be very important non merely to typhoon a patent application that explains your product or invention in detail but to also make sure to make every bit many claims as possible related to your invention.

Amercement Awarded in a Patent Infringement Lawsuit

If a patent infringement lawsuit is successful, patent holders typically receive an honour of damages from the infringer for the infringement on the patented invention.  This damage award can be adamant either by the fact finder at trial, or past the court post-obit a trial.

Section 284 of the Federal Patent Act provides the underlying key framework for a damages accolade in a patent infringement lawsuit. Damages must be the corporeality that volition compensate the patent holder for the infringement and at to the lowest degree must amount to a reasonable royalty for the infringer's employ of the patented invention.

The court also can award upward to three times the actual amount of damages incurred, if the judge feels that the situation warrants information technology. This is typically merely washed in egregious instances of patent infringement.

Unremarkably, amercement are awarded in the form of royalty payment for infringing on the patented invention. This ways the infringing party would still be able to market the competing invention merely would have to pay the patent holder a per centum of whatever profit that it makes.

A patent holder is also eligible to recover what are called "lost profits." Lost profits are the profits that a patent holder lost because of the infringing production. Lost profits are not oftentimes awarded as they can be more difficult to prove because they are oftentimes viewed as speculative by the court.

Some other potential remedy for patent infringement is to obtain an injunction confronting the infringing production.  This would forestall the infringing party from continuing to make and sell the infringing invention. An injunction is typically seen equally a more than farthermost remedy by the court. Therefore, a courtroom normally avoids application an injunction except in more unique circumstances where it may be justified.

Drafting Patents to Ensure Claim Structure Analysis

Because patent infringement tin become an issue downwardly the line for your patent, it is helpful to draft your patent awarding with patent infringement lawsuits in mind. Specifically, it is of import to draft your patent claims with the thought in listen that a courtroom may one solar day analyze each specific discussion used in the claim drafting.

Thoroughly Search for Prior Art

Make sure that you thoroughly research all the potential prior fine art that is available. More than that, brand certain that your claims and specification are drafted in a way that distinguishes any prior fine art that may exist similar to your merits. It is of import to find the line betwixt specificity and generality. You desire to distinguish the prior art enough that you are awarded the patent because your invention is sufficiently different. On the other manus, y'all practice not desire to draft yourself into a corner that a courtroom may so hold you to later when yous are in a patent infringement lawsuit.

Construct Well Written Claims

A well written claim is very important to succeeding in a patent infringement lawsuit. Consult a patent attorney well-nigh how many claims are all-time for your particular invention. A patent will have a range of claim numbers. In fact, you only demand i merits for a patent.

Typically, though, a patent awarding volition accept around 20 claims. This is considering this is the well-nigh claims that can be made in a patent application without paying additional filing fees.

Make certain to use terms in a clear mode within each and every claim. Make sure you lot apply these terms consistently throughout the claims and the specification. Place details in the specification that will help shed lite on any potential areas of confusion within the claim linguistic communication.

Try to conceptualize the areas where an outside individual will have questions or find something unclear or incomplete. This will save yous money down the line, every bit a patent examiner volition likely be the first to ask those questions.

An experienced patent attorney will be able to assist betoken out the areas of weakness in how your claims are drafted. Your attorney will also be able to advise where and when to ascertain terms, and when to let terms to exist left undefined considering they are intuitive for the reader.

How Do You Know if Your Infringing on a Patent

Source: https://goldsteinpatentlaw.com/how-patent-infringement-determined/

Share this post