Patent Searches- IIPRD’s Support Services

Significance of patenting and patent searches

A patent ensures the protection of an invention for a limited period of time. Upon patenting an invention, a third party will be restricted from commercially exploiting or duplicating the invention in any manner. According to most patent laws around the world, several criteria must be satisfied in order to patent an invention. Such conditions may include the invention being a patentable subject matter, having some level of novelty attached to it, consisting of an inventive step, or having an element of non-obviousness linked to it. The invention must be capable of industrial application as well. Applying for a patent is one of the first steps to legally protect your invention. Patenting an invention is a rather elaborate process that consumes time and money. A professional must carry out the process of patenting an invention since several components related to it are incredibly technical. In India, the fee for filing a patent ranges from INR 14,000 to INR 20,000. Additionally, the patentee should also pay an additional fee to the patent agent or the attorney filing the patent for them. Thus, in a broad sense, patent searches can be defined as the process of searching several patent databases and other sources of literature to inspect if any pre-existing invention is similar to the patentee’s invention, for research, or for making other market-related decisions.

Why is it imperative to conduct a patent search?

Attorneys or patent agents conduct patent searches to determine the chances of being granted a patent. It also helps the patentee and the attorney to determine the differences between the invention at hand and pre-existing inventions. Upon enumerating such differences, the attorney and the patentee may draft their application accordingly, thus increasing their chances of being granted a patent. A patent search may also significantly reduce the chances of the patentee’s invention’s claims overlapping with the claims of a pre-existing invention. Moreover, a patent search could provide information on companies attempting to patent inventions similar to the applicant’s inventions. patent application This way, the applicant may contact such companies for licensing purposes. It is pertinent to note that even if a patent application is rejected, its claims and other details pertaining to the invention would be available on the database. Through a patent search, the patentee can assess the reasons behind the rejection of the application, which may allow the patentee and their attorney to draft the application effectively. PatentScope (WIPO), DEPATISnet, U.S Patent Assignment Database (USPTO), Google Patents, and Espacenet are the most popular patent search databases.

[Image Source:gettyimages]

The most prominent types of patent searches are- Novelty/ Patentability search, Freedom to Operate (FTO)/ Infringement analysis, Validity/ Invalidity Search, State of the art search, and technology landscape analysis.

Novelty/Patentability Search:

A novelty search, otherwise termed a patentability search, is performed to examine the novelty pertaining to an invention before filing it. During a patentability search, prior arts (pre-existing inventions) similar to the applicant’s inventions are identified, scrutinized, and compared to enumerate the novelty of the applicant’s invention. A patentability search is vital for effectively drafting the patent application. Furthermore, a patentee can also plan their further research regarding the invention by analyzing the type of research carried out for the pre-existing inventions related to the applicant’s inventions.

Freedom to Operate search (FTO)

A Freedom to Operate search is also called a ‘clearance search’. An FTO search is used to determine the commercial viability of an invention. In other words, an FTO would help determine if there exists any invention in the market space that the applicant’s invention would infringe upon, thus, preventing the applicant from commercially exploiting their invention. An FTO search exclusively focuses on an invention’s ‘claims’ part to examine if any other pre-existing invention has similar claims. It enumerates the chances of a potential case of infringement that could be made against the applicant’s invention by any other inventor. Typically, an FTO search is considered to be an elaborate and immensely expensive process.

Validity/ Invalidity search

A validity search is also called an opposition study. Typically, a validity search is conducted when a defendant in a patent infringement lawsuit attempts to invalidate an inventor’s patent. Thus, the primary purpose of a validity search is to revoke or invalidate a registered patent’s claims. Additionally, a validity search may also be conducted before entity licenses or purchases a particular patent. Through the search, the buyer or the licensee can determine the strengths and weaknesses pertaining to the patent. This way, the buyer or the licensee can avoid buying a patent that can be easily invalidated.

State of the art search

A state-of-the-art search attempts to examine a particular area of technology, thus shifting the focus from examining only a specific invention.  A state-of-the-art search is generally conducted by inventors who may be interested in learning about the technological developments in a particular industry. Such inventors study the patents pertaining to a particular industry to recalibrate their research strategies. To conduct a state of the art search, inventors may also refer to literature such as research paper publications to study the patents existing in a particular industry.

Technology landscape analysis/ Patent Landscape reports

A technology landscape analysis or a patent landscape report provides an overview of the patents pertaining to a particular area of technology. Such reports may be specific to a particular region. Patent landscape reports can be used as a piece of empirical evidence to regulate policies or to support research related to a particular area of technology. According to WIPO, patent landscape reports can also be used to “inform policy discussions, strategic research planning or technology transfer”. Several researchers have used patent landscape reports to draw insights on the future of a particular area of technology as well. Through a patent landscape analysis, business development teams may also have a chance to identify the assignees related to a particular type of technology. This may help in sourcing potential licensing opportunities, identifying key suppliers and competitors.

IIPRD, a premier Patent Support, and IP firm have been extensively working with thousands of clients to fulfill their needs for patent services. With their strong experience in this field, IIPRD’s professionals have been assisting exemplary clients around the world with their IP support.

Author: Sanjana, a BBA LLB student of  Symbiosis Law School (Hyderabad), in case of any queries please contact/write back to us at vidushi@khuranaandkhurana.com.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

8 − six =

Archives

  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • September 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010