In today's fast-paced business landscape, safeguarding intellectual
Empower your IP success: Unleash innovation with our Large Language model-driven solutions!
Empower your IP success: Unleash innovation with our Large Language model-driven solutions!
We provide cutting-edge Hybrid Patent Prosecution & Office Action Response services to secure patent rights for our clients. Our experts analyze patent office objections, prepare a winning strategy, and respond in writing to advance your patent application swiftly towards grant.
Streamlined Office Action Assistance
We have hired TT Constants to draft over 30 responses to U.S. patent office rejections.
Their responses show a mastery of the patent prosecution process, a thorough review of the cited prior art, and an exquisite understanding of the underlying patent application.
I am very impressed with the effort TT expends in showing that the cited prior art does not read up on the claim set. Other vendors gloss over this task and miss valuable information that distinguishes the client’s invention from the cited prior art.
I am very impressed with the entire staff of TT and can tell that the CEO is a former U.S. patent examiner who keeps his staff current on MPEP changes and the shifting landscape of what is now considered as patentable subject matter. TT fights very hard to turn patent office rejections into notices of allowance.
–Navigate Patent Prosecution Process
–Respond to Office Actions
–Overcome Patent Rejections
– Enhance Patent Claims
Experienced Patent Prosecution Support Professionals with Technical and Legal Expertise
Strategic Guidance in Responding to Office Actions
Expert Analysis of Patent Rejections and Claims
Maximize the Likelihood of Patent Grant and Protection
To learn more:
A matchmaking company wanted to obtain a patent for an AI based matchmaking invention. TT Consultants drafted and assisted in filing a US patent application. The application involved the use of AI technology for matchmaking of users based on certain parameters.
The USPTO issued an Office Action rejecting the patent application by relying on more than one prior-art document. Our prosecution team worked on the response to the Office Action and prepared detailed arguments against the rejection.
With a minimal amendment, the patent application was granted by the USPTO without issuing any further Office Action which awarded the client the intended protection for their technology.
A US-based client of TT Consultants wanted to make substantial changes in the patent application post the issuance of an Office Action.
The USPTO had raised serious rejections against the pending claims of the application. The application was drafted by the inventors themselves, and since the inventors were unaware of the legal requirement of a patent application, the claims suffered from multiple drawbacks under 35 U.S.C. §112(b).
Our prosecution team studied the application to develop an in-depth understanding of the invention and drafted a new set of claims, keeping in mind the claim amendments requirements under the US patent law. The new set of claims was filed in response to the Office Action and the USPTO issued the patent without raising any further rejections
In today's fast-paced business landscape, safeguarding intellectual
A freedom-to-operate search, often known as an
A patentability search, often referred to as
No, issuing an office action is a common practice and, in fact, one of the steps of the patent prosecution process of a patent application. A patent office action is issued by any patent office to make sure that a patent is issued for a valid invention. Patent prosecution support services can help guide you through this process and avoid unnecessary office actions.
There is no specific format to prepare the response. However, it is essential to respond to all the objections raised in the office action. Leaving or refusing to provide a response or to comply with the office requirements may result in the issuance of another office action or rejection of the patent application. Utilizing patent filing and prosecution services can assist you in preparing comprehensive office action responses that address all objections effectively.
Yes. An examiner can combine two or more documents while examining the non-obviousness/inventiveness requirement if they think that a skilled person would be able to do so. The examiner provides reasoning as to why the different documents can be combined.
Any new matter cannot be added to the description or claims once the patent application is filed. In some jurisdictions, the examiner may allow the incorporation of features described in the filed specification into the claims. Expert patent filing and prosecution services can assist in making strategic amendments to claims to effectively address objections without introducing new matters.
Different jurisdictions have different provisions for speaking with the examiner. For instance, during prosecution in the US patent prosecution process, it is possible to schedule a call with the examiner after the issue of an office action to understand his viewpoint. During prosecution in India, a hearing provides an opportunity to discuss the invention with the examiner. IP filing and prosecution services can guide you through the process of communicating with examiners and presenting your invention effectively.
Remember that a solid patent prosecution process, supported by patent prosecution support services and expert guidance, can help you navigate office actions successfully and increase the chances of securing a valuable patent for your invention.