by Kathleen Lynch | Mar 31, 2026 | Entrepreneur, Entrepreneurship, Innovation, Invention, Inventor, Patent, Patent Prosecution, Patentability, Small Business, Start Up, Start Up Considerations, Uncategorized, US Patent Office
A patentability search and assessment is always recommended when evaluating whether your invention would be entitled to meaningful patent protection. The search also helps to inform the inventor and patent attorney where there may be areas of more narrow protection and draft accordingly.
The United States Patent Office recently launched the AI Search Automated Pilot Program. The program is designed to evaluate the examination process by including an automated pre-examination search, and whether the inclusion will improve quality and efficiency of examinations.
The program (ASAP!) will conduct an automated search for original, noncontinuing, nonprovisional applications. The automated search results will be sent to the applicant and will provide an earlier communication regarding potential prior art issues. Under the pilot program, applicants will not be required to respond to the search results.
However, the search results may provide an opportunity to the applicant to file a preliminary amendment in an effort to place the application in a stronger position for allowance. Alternatively, the applicant may wish to file an express abandonment and obtain a fee refund in view of search results that indicate a lack of patentability.
Recently, the U.S. Patent Office has announced that it is waiving the fee requirement for any petition to participate under 37 C.F.R. 1.182 filed after March 23, 2026. This should enable self filing entrepreneurs and inventors to take advantage of this new program for free!
Capitalizing on innovative developments is critical to any organization. Having the right person to help you make those decisions is important. The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game. The first consultation is free. Email us at kl****@*****aw.com.
Photo by Szorstki on FreeImages
by Kathleen Lynch | Mar 26, 2026 | Patent, Patent Prosecution
A client of mine read this post and found me. He recently contacted me about a different matter, and it reminded me of this post, so I thought I would share it again.
We hear a lot these days about cost cutting and austerity. I also hear a bit of grousing from time to time from people who use IP legal services about costs. I believe inventors and companies can find reasonably priced intellectual property law services when the potential client does her homework.
First, check out smaller cities, towns and suburbs. Larger cities have higher overhead costs. Firms pay more for rent, salaries etc. Smaller cities and towns have many talented patent firms, attorneys and agents equally qualified to do the work at more reasonable rates.
If you are focusing on patent preparation and prosecution, you don’t need to stay in your own backyard. With all of the wonderful modern tools of connectedness, your patent agent or attorney can be as close or as far away as you want them to be. Documents are easily exchanged via the internet, and telephone and video conferences can connect folks who are time zones apart. Where there is a significant distance, time zones may become an issue, but you will find that most patent attorneys and agents are willing to provide the necessary flexibility to make the relationship work, including trips to your offices at a discount or gratis in exchange for keeping your business.
Background matters. Take a look and ask questions about what kind of work your patent attorney does. What was his or her major in college? Did they work as a scientist or engineer before they practiced patent law? If so, what did they do? What is the focus of their present practice? If you are looking for someone to prepare and file a patent application, you don’t want to work with someone whose experience is limited to patent litigation. Just like you wouldn’t allow your internist to perform heart surgery, you don’t want someone with a chemistry background preparing patent applications for you if you are in the high tech industry. Find someone who has the technical background suited to your project, as well as the experience needed to meet your needs. In looking for possible patent attorneys or agents, check out the US Patent and Trademark website which enables you to search either for a particular person or those registered to practice before the US Patent Office in a particular location. Once you have that, check out their credentials and ask questions before you make your decision.
Selecting the right patent attorney is important to ensure your patent strategy is managed by someone with the appropriate experience and background. The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC has over 35 years of experience in the preparation and prosecution of patent applications and is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game. The first consultation is free. Email us at kl****@*****aw.com.
by Kathleen Lynch | Jul 20, 2015 | Patent
Patent trolls are a term used to a patent owner or licensee that seeks payment from companies allegedly infringing on the troll’s patent rights. Rather than fight the allegation, the company complies with the troll’s demands. The patent troll typically sends out multiple letters and thus may amass a considerable fortune.
Many companies are growing tired of the patent trolls and their seemingly unjust demands. To counter the trolls, many states have or are in the process of enacting anti-troll legislation. Florida, for example, recently passed a law that seemingly protects businesses from the demands of the patent trolls. The law enables a company to sue a patent troll for sending a letter in bad faith. The law includes a “loser pays” provision meaning that if the patent troll loses the action in court, they will need to pay the attorney’s fees for the opposing party as well as any damage award.
What’s the take away here? Well, patent troll legislation may be needed. However, the language and provisions need to be drafted in such a way that does not create more problems than the problems they are designed to fix.
Identifying, protecting and asserting your intellectual property rights is critical to any organization. Having the right person to help you through the process is important. The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game. The first telephone consultation is free. Email us at kl****@*****aw.com.
by Kathleen Lynch | Jun 26, 2015 | Patent
Turns out, big business can play nice. In an effort to encourage innovation, Ford Motor Company recently announced that it will allow competitors to access its patents relating to electric and hybrid vehicle technology. Executive Chairman William Clay Ford, Jr. says that the release of the patents was for “industry-wide research and development of electrified vehicles” and the goal of sharing the patent portfolio is mainly to spur innovative development. By sharing ideas, competitors can allow for more industry wide development and faster results. Sharing data and patents is also expected to allow for the mass production of electric cars so that they become more affordable for consumers.
The Ford patent portfolio at issue is substantial. In 2014 alone, Ford filed for over 400 patents relating to electric vehicles. In addition, Ford owns over 650 such patents, with an additional 1,000 patents currently pending in the area of electric and hybrid vehicle technology.
Any company interested in investigating this technology can either contact Ford’s technology commercialization office or access the patents through AutoHarvest, which is a website for members to share and explore new technologies. Ford is a co-founder of AutoHarvest. There will be a fee to access the patents.
Ford’s sharing of its patent portfolio is well intended. However, it also makes good business sense. If new developments are made based on Ford’s technology, there is a potential licensing stream or other business arrangement in Ford’s favor. The electric car market is fast-growing, Ford has an opportunity to capitalize on continued growth of the electric and hybrid vehicle markets as well as future battery developments.
Patent sharing seems to be a recent trend for automobile companies, but Tesla was in the forefront. Last year, Elon Musk of Tesla released Tesla patents relating to electric vehicle and battery technology to help other companies produce better electric cars, and boost consumer confidence when switching to electric cars. Musk was quoted as being “frustrated” that other companies had not yet produced long-range electric cars. The likely thinking for Tesla and Ford is that speeding the adoption of electric vehicle and battery technology will help their organizations more than their competitors.
Capitalizing on innovative developments is critical to any organization. Having the right person to help you make those decisions is important. The Law Office of Kathleen Lynch PLLC is designed to help businesses such as yours keep ahead of the game. The first telephone consultation is free. Email us at kl****@*****aw.com.
by Kathleen Lynch | May 12, 2015 | Patent, Trademark
The United States Patent and Trademark Office recently announced this year’s Patent for Humanity Awards. The program was initiated by the Obama administration to promote game-changing innovations to solve long standing development challenges. This year’s winners include Sanofi, Novartis, American Standard Brands, SunPower Corp., Nutriset, Golden Rice and GRIT (Global Research Innovation & Technology). Congratulations to each organization. The accomplishments of each organization are truly inspirational and are set forth below.
Sanofi:
Artemisinin is an important antimalarial drug derived from the sweet wormwood plant native in Asia and Africa. However the growing cycles, crop yields and weather caused volatility in the supply of the drug. A public private partnership was created to address this problem with support from University of California Berkeley, Amyris and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Sanofi supplied its chemical expertise and industrial capacity and is now supplying large quantities of artemisinin at a no-profit-no-loss basis for use in developing countries around the world.
Novartis:
Tuberculosis kills more adults than any other infectious disease other than HIV/AIDS. Multidrug resistant forms of TB are especially challenging to treat and cure. Novartis has discovered a group of compounds that are active against these resistant strains of TB. In an arrangement requiring no upfront or milestone payments, Novartis has provided their entire TB R&D program, to the TB Alliance, a non-profit product development partnership that seeks to find new and improved TB treatment regimens.
American Standard Brands:
American Standard’s Safe Toilet Technology (“SaTo”) was created for people lacking access to basic sanitation around the world. The SaTo Technology includes latrine pans and collectors with a counterweighted trapdoor-like flapper that can be flushed by pouring a small amount of water onto it. When closed, the flapper door creates an air-tight seal that reduces odors and prevents insects from entering and exiting the pit, eliminating a primary route of disease transmission. American Standard has partnered with a number of non-profit organizations to distribute the SaTo pans and collectors throughout the developing world. To date, over 700,000 SaTo pans have been distributed in Bangladesh, Uganda, Haiti, Malawi, and the Philippines.
SunPower Corp:
Almost 18 percent of the world’s population lack’s sufficient access to energy sources. Traditional forms of lighting are combustion-based (firewood, charcoal, kerosene and dung), contributing to an estimated 3.5 million deaths a year from health impacts and house fires. For these communities, SunPower has outfitted a standard shipping container with solar panels on top and equipment inside to power hundreds of safe, rechargeable lanterns. Locals rent these lanterns for a small fee which is then reinvested to expand and improve the program. SunPower donates the container and supplies to partner organizations, along with ongoing technical support.
Nutriset:
According to UNICEF, as many as 67 million children suffer from acute malnutrition annually. Children suffering from prolonged malnutrition often develop digestive problems that disable their ability to eat more food, causing further health problems and death. Nutriset developed nutritional products made from peanuts and other ingredients to help malnourished children quickly and safely regain weight and digestive function. Nutriset delivers their Plumpy’Nut branded products throughout the world with partners like UNICEF and USAID. Nutriset also offers open licensing to producers in the developing world so communities can work toward self-sufficiency.
Golden Rice:
Vitamin A deficiency continues to be is the leading killer of children globally (2 – 3 million annually) and is also the leading cause of childhood blindness (500,000 cases annually). Most cases occur in Asia where the staple food white rice, eaten by 3.5 billion people daily, lacks vitamin A sources typically found in animal products and leafy vegetables. These deaths and blindness are preventable. Golden Rice was genetically enhanced by technology invented by Professors Potrykus and Beyer. The enhanced version of the rice provides a source of vitamin A for people subsisting mainly on rice. The professors have worked with Dr. Dubock since 2000 to donate the enhanced rice technology to the poor in developing countries. Local Golden Rice varieties are currently being developed by public sector institutions in Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Philippines, and Vietnam. Through licenses with national governments, farmers are free to plant, grow, harvest, locally sell, and replant seed – there are no licenses for farmers and no fees for use.
Global Research Innovation & Technology (GRIT):
About 65 million people in the developing world require wheelchairs. Often conventional wheelchairs don’t function properly on the uneven terrain commonly found in developing regions. GRIT was created by engineering graduates of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) to increase mobility for the disabled globally. Their three-wheel Leveraged Freedom Chair uses a push-lever drivetrain to help people move over broken pavement, dirt roads, fields, hills, rocky terrain and more. It’s built from standard bicycle parts to enable local repairs with available materials. After graduating, the MIT students founded GRIT to bring the product to market, and MIT assisted by transferring the patent rights to GRIT for further development. The chair has been distributed in partnership with the World Bank, Red Cross, and others in India, Brazil, Guatemala, Guinea, Kenya, Haiti, Easter Island, Nepal, and Tanzania. A new version of the Leveraged Freedom Chair, known simply as the Freedom Chair, is now available in the United States for recreational use, helping Americans move beyond the pavement.
by Kathleen Lynch | May 8, 2015 | Patent
Ericsson AB has sued Apple Inc. in three countries, according to statements from Ericsson. The lawsuits are based on patent infringement allegations stemming from failed licensing negotiations.
Ericsson has filed actions in Germany, the U.K. and the Netherlands and added to pending US actions. Erisson is looking for a patent license agreement and royalty payments for its patented mobile phone interface, battery and operating technologies.
Ericsson’s chief intellectual property officer, Kasim Alfalahi, stated that “everybody needs to take a license for the technologies we are providing to them” and “it’s a very serious thing, regardless of who the company is.”
Ericsson and Apple had a previous license agreement that expired in January 2015. The companies sued each other when renewal negotiations for a new license failed. Apple seeks a court ruling on whether Ericsson’s royalty rates for its technology were fair and reasonable.
An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment on the matter and referred to a January statement that the company’s “always been willing to pay a fair price to secure the rights,” and that legal action was needed to help strike an agreement with Ericsson.
Apple’s iPhone and iPad have been highly successful in recent years, but Ericsson was one of the early entrants in the mobile-device market. The company sold its mobile-phone business to Sony Corp. in February 2012, five years after Apple introduced the iPhone.
