While a provisional application merely reserves your filing date, a non-provisional patent application is a full application that will be examined and can mature into an issued patent. To give you an idea of the total costs of a non-provisional, from filing through to issuance, including patent attorney fees and USPTO official fees, we’ll break down the typical costs by year:
The below is a press release from our client, Cube Cities. We're happy to have had a long, succesful relationship and look forward to future innovations from this team.
There is a myth in the US that anyone can prepare and file a patent themselves (we call this a pro se filing) and receive meaningful protection. Inventors sometimes file academic papers outlining their findings, for example, and attach a basic claim. While an early patent filing that provides a full disclosure can, during prosecution, be amended by a professional to have a reasonable scope of claims, once issued, the patent is difficult and costly to rectify, if this is even possible.
Top Considerations regarding European Patent Law from a US perspective
So here’s a situation… You have an invention all worked out, with all the parts and processes and figures. You contact your patent attorney and decide that you’d like to have them prepare your application for examination by the USPTO.
No one wants to face a examiner objections during their patent application process, especially when filing multiple applications in different countries. Their objections slow down or halts a patent application from being granted. This is when MU Patents comes in - our experience will help to reduce patent prosecution costs during this process.
The following information intends to answer some of the initial questions you may have in pursuing protection for your invention. Patent law is not an area of common sense, and feeling lost when you are just getting started is not uncommon. This post will answer the questions you may hesitate to ask.
Alice Series: Part 1. The Alice decision has changed the landscape of software patenting in the US. The Supreme Court provided a powerful negation of business method patents but with little guidance on where the line can be drawn for valid subject matter in the area of software and intangible computer inventions. The Court reaffirmed the Mayo test and brought it into the forefront. One thing is certain – USPTO Examiners are issuing 35 U.S.C. 101 objections at the faintest scent of a generic computer.