Le 4 mai 2021, la plateforme Yahoo Questions/Réponses fermera. Elle est désormais accessible en mode lecture seule. Aucune modification ne sera apportée aux autres sites ou services Yahoo, ni à votre compte Yahoo. Vous trouverez plus d’informations sur l'arrêt de Yahoo Questions/Réponses et sur le téléchargement de vos données sur cette page d'aide.
Is this the correct way to write patent claims?
I have invented a new game and want to patent it.
There are several ways to embody this game, so in claim 1 I completely describe the concept but give no concrete manifestation of it.
In claim 2 I list several concrete embodiments.
Is this correct or do I need to put one concrete embodiment in the first independent claim?
Thank you both for your suggestions.
Vikram P, I finally struggled through the sample that you linked to me. Thanks for that.
A few question arise. Mainly, I see no mention in the claims of the sliding and rolling methods for changing the goal math indicia. Does that mean they are not covered by the patent? Why bother putting them into the description?
3 réponses
- Vikram PLv 5il y a 1 décennieRéponse favorite
The answer to your question mainly depends upon the type of game and method of playing it, however as you have specified that there are several ways to embody this game, you should go through the following patent:
ORIGINAL APPLICATION:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=yR0cAAAAEBAJ&prin...
HTML FORMAT:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=yR0cAAAAEBAJ
However I would recommend you to take legal advice if you are really planning to go for commercial production. :)
- il y a 1 décennie
You can have multiple claim chains in a patent. For example, you can have a basic embodiment in a claim, then followup with more precise subclaims, known as "dependent" claims. Alternatively, you can have a series of independent claims.
Bear in mind that for your filing fee, you only get 3 independent claims and 20 total claims, so if you include more, you'll have to pay additional fees.
Source(s) : http://www.uspto.gov/ - ?Lv 4il y a 5 ans
the 1st declare could desire to describe your invention in as great words as you may think of of, which you wont study on something else. A sport comprising: a sq. board with a fold in the middle and discrete play zones arranged adjoining to an outer part thereof; a plurality sport tokens representative of a respective plurality of gamers; a pair of cube to be rolled sequentially by using each participant; the consequence of the roll of which being selective or restrictive of a clean place of the token representative of the participant that rolled the cube; and a set of rules describing the rewards, effects and privileges afforded to gamers for accomplishing particlular positions on the sport board. could be a declare a million.....in spite of the undeniable fact that it "reads on" monopoly and so, could be rejected. Assuming you come back up with declare a million which you think of would not study on previous paintings, then the based claims could desire to upload yet another layer of specificity, that further distinguishes your sport from the previous paintings. 2. the sport of declare a million wherein the die of the pair of cube each have 7 factors and wherein a respective form represented by using each respective part is depicted in roman numerals. Sound complicated? it incredibly is. it is why there are patent legal professionals and brokers. hire one.
