1997

Searching for patentability

Assuming that a claimed invention provides a novel solution to a technical problem and that prior art/literature search as well as product search are the preliminary phase of a patenting journey, at the end of which a decision is made either to start the journey or just strike it through, we implement our custom multilingual search & scan algorithm to get the most out of available data sources.

Stressing the fact that the whole journey, including the search phase, may be very costly in terms of time and money even after a patent is granted, the decision made here gains crucial importance.

In this context, focusing deeply on the knowledge behind a claimed invention, its independent claim(s) and the components thereof and applying the so-called "problem-solution" approach to determine the closest prior art lead us to a starting point. During this process, we pay attention to the terminology, which may vary from generic terms to industry jargon, as well as to the ambiguity of terms possibly used in prior art documents. An efficient brainstorming session conducted afterwards provides a list of target keywords under the correct patent classification. Using this data set, we search and investigate various public and private patent and non-patent literature databases to get the most out of available resources.

Taken altogether, we prepare a report taking into consideration any material which may partially or completely affect the patentability of the claimed invention in terms of novelty and inventive step criteria. Finally, in the sense of searching for something that—ideally—shouldn't even exist as per your expectations, we preclude the tendency for reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity") that naturally may take place during the search phase.

From translation to drafting

Our work in proofreading, editing and drafting of patent applications is the consequence of our translation activity, through which we found many instances to translate for various patent authorities numerous legal texts on the one hand, and thousands of patent and utility model applications on the other hand.

Furthermore, translation gave us the perspective to differentiate between a well-written patent text and a poorly-written patent text.

Translating a well-written text can be viewed as a straightforward work, provided that the translator in-charge has the required knowledge in the field of translation.

On the contrary, translating a poorly-written text can be considered as a real challenge, which requires the translator to dive into the depths of the text, and also which—on an ethical platform—a translator either refuses, or accepts and becomes also the quasi-editor of the poorly-written text.

In this context, editing has two dimensions. The first one, which actually corresponds to proofreading, is rather the less-demanding dimension, but sometimes can still require a translator to understand the subject matter being translated to provide a fluently-composed text. The second dimension that corresponds to editing itself, on the other hand, requires a translator to have knowledge on, or the potential to understand the subject-matter to make the necessary amendments and corrections on the original text under the supervision of its author.

In brief, our engagement in proofreading, editing and drafting evolved spontaneously from our translation activities, as a result of which we began to provide to patent attorneys both the drafting and the translation of patent applications by the same person in-charge.

In doing so, we adhere to the rules and conventions under the European Patent Office (EPO), the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the Turkish Patent and Trademark Office.