3 ms·

Thanks for the pointers. I have written a few patents. Well, I wrote the invention part and paid supposedly good patent attorneys to clean it up and write the

Thanks for the pointers. I have written a few patents. Well, I wrote the invention part and paid supposedly good patent attorneys to clean it up and write the claims and educate me on the process. I "thought" my lawyers told me the first few claims (1-3?) have to stand on their own and the rest can build on the invention. Meaning, if the first few are not unique inventions, the whole thing fell apart. More info would be useful.

GHFigs 17y ago
I wouldn't doubt your lawyers! They were probably right in a context that does not generalize exactly. I am not a lawyer and speak from no authority but curiosity, so I could be completely wrong or misleadingly close to being right, but I think the main point is confirmed by this, from the "Claims" section of the first result for "how to read a patent" (http://www.bpmlegal.com/howtopat5.html http://www.bpmlegal.com/howtopat5.html): "Each dependent claim must be narrower than the claim upon which it depends." The full example is too long to quote, but I encourage you to read it. The obvious problem with this is that it is an implicit convention in an otherwise very explicit kind of document. It's no wonder at all that it is not widely understood.