There are three types of patents, utility, design, and plant. There are also two subtypes of utility and plant patents called provisional and nonprovisional. The majority of patents are for nonprovisional utility patents.

Utility patents protect inventions that are a novel, nonobvious, and useful:

• Process
• Machine
• Article of manufacture
• Composition of matter
• Or an improvement of any of the above items. Most patents are for incremental improvements in known technology; the innovation is evolution rather than revolution.
• Design patents are for the new ornamental design of an article of manufacture. One example is the look of an athletic shoe. All Star Wars characters were protected by design patents.

Plant patents provide patent protection for asexually reproduced any distinct and new variety of plant.

• Laws of nature
• Physical phenomena
• Abstract ideas
• Literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works. These can be Copyright protected.
• Inventions which are considered not useful or possible by the USPTO for example perpetual motion machines; or offensive to public morality.

       When a patent application is filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (U.S.P.T.O.), a Patent Examiner, in determining patentability, must find that the invention is (1) useful, (2) novel, and (3) non-obvious.  The invention is useful if it has a present-day useful purpose.  Novelty is satisfied unless the Examiner finds a single prior art reference which contains all of the features of the invention which are claimed in the patent application. 
       
       In determining whether an invention is obvious, an Examiner may rely on the combined teachings of several patents, printed publications or other prior art references.  If a hypothetical person of ordinary skill would view the claimed invention either as an obvious combination of the individual features disclosed in several references, or as an obvious extension of the existing technology, then the Examiner will reject the application as not patentable.  In reality, the determination of obviousness involves subjective judgment regarding, for example, the actual content of the prior art, the level of skill of the ordinary skilled person in the technical field and the reasonableness of combining features from different source references.

       We have found that the best method of evaluating whether to proceed with a patent application is to conduct a patentability search in the U.S.P.T.O.  The inventor first discloses his invention to us and then we will conduct the search.  In conducting the search, all properly classified and filed U.S. patents which are pertinent to the invention are reviewed and copies are ordered for your records.  We then draft a patentability opinion letter indicating the scope of the patent protection which we feel is available for the invention.  Foreign patents, periodicals and textbooks are not searched since they are not well classified.  Consequently, a patentability search is approximately 90% effective in locating any given piece of pertinent prior art.

       The results of the search may help you to better define the invention or to identify alternative embodiments of the invention, and may help us to draft the text of the patent application and to draft claims in a way, which would give the broadest possible protection to the invention.
       
       Our fee for conducting a patentability search is $600.00 - 800.00, which includes our initial office conference, the patentability search, and the opinion letter.  This $600.00 - 800.00 fee must be paid in advance.  Filing without a patentability search, though possible, is generally not recommended.

       Please also be advised that the scope of a patentability investigation is quite different from an infringement investigation and study, and the results of a patentability search should not be considered dispositive of all infringement questions.

       Under U.S. law, the application must be filed within one year of the first public use or disclosure, sale or offer for sale of an item embodying the invention. 

       Equally important, many foreign countries require that the patent application be filed before any publication, demonstration, or sale of the device.  If an application is filed in the U.S. before the first date of any publication, demonstration, or sale, most countries will accord that U.S. "effective filing date" to applications filed in the foreign country within one year.  During this one year interval, the benefit of the earlier United States filing date will attach to such foreign patent application.   Thus, to preserve your foreign filing rights, it is recommended that the U.S. application be filed prior to the first public disclosure or sale of the invention.

       To be awarded a patent, the inventor cannot have earlier abandoned, suppressed or concealed the invention.  This requires that the inventor be diligent in both completing the invention and in filing for patent protection.  Further, an inventor should always keep in mind that an earlier filing date is helpful where the U.S.P.T.O. has to decide upon which of two pending applications for the same invention should be allowed to issue.

       Should a decision be made to file a patent application on your invention through this office, we can advise that the cost of a typical utility patent application is approximately:

Our Fees                           $3,000 - $4,500 (if we write the application); or 
                                            $500.00 when the application is received in conditions for filing 
                       
Misc. cost (Postage, etc.)       $20.00 
USPTO Filing Fees                 $500.00 (small entity – less than 500 employees)      
Drawings Fees                        $90.00 per sheet (if required)

In the case that you provided us with the application, we will revise the application to “US format” (appropriate section headers, removing multiple dependencies from claims, etc). This is easily done if you provide us with an electronic copy of the application. (Best to do at time of filing, in order to prevent formalities rejections on the first Office Action.) If you do not provide us with an electronic copy of the specification, we will have to retype many pages of specification.  
 
As you know, it is necessary to file an Information Disclosure Statement disclosing to the US Examiner all prior art of which the inventor/patent attorney is aware that the US Examiner should consider in making his decision whether to allow or reject the claims of the application.  
 
To minimize the number of bills, our first bill usually covers everything up to the first Office Action. Thus, do not expect a second bill until after the filing of a response to the first Office Action.