The j-pole antenna is fixed...

OK, here we go.

Here's my experience talking...whether you wish to accept it is your choice. I proffer it as an educational example.

My 65th US patent issues in three week. I have, oh 50 pending US applications. I have had 10 issued patents in the last year, most single inventor, none with herd of other inventors. I write the claims. My attorney edits them.

Every single one of those patent applications has been rejected, first off, by the US patent office. Every single one led to issuance after rejection. IOW, it is RARE that a US utility patent application is NOT rejected straight off. If you have some experience with patents, you should know this--rejections are mostly based on assertions by the examiner about obviousness, prior art, and 'failure to claim the invention'. These are issues resolved by fact and wording, that follow up in an iterative (albeit expensive) way.

I reviewed the file wrapper in PUBLIC PAIR. The attorney combined and re-worded the modified claims and that met the criteria of 'definiteness' and novelty. Birnbaum was overcome as prior art (rejection) with the final claims (amended).

This is 100% typical of the process in my experience..

We have already gone over John's claim 1 and why it is not prior art. Please read that post again.

The USG owns the patent and can determine how it is used in the marketplace. In general, the USG takes kindly to commercial use (as licensed) and compensation for the inventor.

73
Chip W1YW

 

^ Thanks Chip, glad we have another real Scientist on this list thread... Meaning you and the OP

 

Patents are most often not about science, but about wording of claims. Some get cynical about that, others accept the process and push forward.

Patents are expensive. Even if you write your own application, and have an RPA, it still is tough getting through the door for less than $10,000 a pop all in... $30-50K is more typical.

So why spend all that money?

Some patents break even, most don't collect a dime. Some define the progress of human activity.

Reality is risk. That's why I respect John's patent.

73
Chip W1YW

 

John's website fills in a lot of the claims in the patent with plain language and provides history of his analysis of the J-Pole antenna. I missed all of that, initially.

Ted, KX4OM

 

Ted,

John put all that at the feet of the examiner, and based on that prior art, he kept on beating John over the head on Birnbaum.

After several rounds, the patent attorney had a call with the examiner and then submitted modified claims, which were then approved by the examiner.

This is extraordinarily typical of the machinations of getting a patent. Totally above board and normal. It is the wording of the claims that produced the objections, because they were too broad and thus encompassed known art, or were 'obvious to those skilled in the art'..

I believe that John has filed a continuation to take a stab at --additional-- broader claims. Again, absolutely typical of the process.

Stay well.

73
Chip W1YW

 

I think you could get a better hearing with the "Mafia". The patent process is a real racket controlled by lawyers....what else.

 

Paint it green and sell it as a stealth antenna cactus-lookalike. It'll sell in Arizona.

Jon
KA1TDQ

 

This (to me) reminds me of the idea that sometimes communications requires two people to sit down and talk to each other to clarify meaning, phone calls and e-mails are nice, but they just don't do the job sometimes.

Thanks
Joel

 

Here's a 'secret' in dealing with patent examiners: you can ask them to suggest the wording on a claim, in an 'interview'. They --often--have their own sense of what would constitute 'novelty', but can only suggest some wording IF asked, and typically if there are several rounds of rejecting the prior claims in the exam process.

I think I had my patent attorneys do this twice over 30 years.

Patent examiners are always friendly and often welcome phone conversations, because typically they work at home (exclusively)and actually like discussing new technology and invention. But they are all business when it comes to claims.

It is often counterproductive to look at patent examiners as adversarial. In reality, there are two people who understand an inventor's technology as well as the inventor: the patent attorney and the examiner. Although objective, they are often interested.

Many examiners are fairly recent college grads, and using the perc of free law school(as USG employees) to eventually become patent attorneys themselves.

73
Chip W1YW

 

I'm pointing out that this is a common situation with more than just patent related issues. I relate it to a personal event when a medical specialist and insurance people were having problems processing a claim. They were both doing their very best, but e-mails, and using myself as an intermediary just wasn't working, what it took was for the two of them to sit down face to face and talk, and tell each other what they needed from each other.

Afterwords, everything went very smoothly, follow on people in similar situations were handed a packet to detail what they needed to do to make everything work.

Thanks
Joel