About This Blog

About PatentablyDefinedTM
The idea to create PatentablyDefinedTM came to me sometime in 2006. Back then, I found myself in the role of mentor to several junior patent associates who, for a variety of reasons, weren’t being shown the techniques or exposed to the strategies that they needed to grow into really good prosecutors. They knew the law, but not how to use it. It seemed only logical then that there were probably others out there looking for this information. That was it, a blog was born. I think that first post from April 2007 continues to sum up what this blog is all about:

Welcome to the Patentably Defined Blog. I intend this blog to be a practical resource for patent practitioners, providing engaging discussions of various patent prosecution strategies along with practical suggestions and useful examples. The many strategies and practice examples that will appear on this blog are for the consideration of those who will (hopefully) visit this blog, and the opinions, suggestions, and commentary of those visitors are humbly solicited.

And, as it turned out that there were more than a few people interested in the techniques and strategies I was to discuss. The growth in readership has simply exceeded my wildest expectations. From my first post (which drew 28 unique visitors), I now have several thousands readers and subscribers from five continents. There hasn’t been a conference that I have attended or a country that I have visited where I did not find regular readers of this blog. I like to think that this following is a reflection of the content I have posted, which is a continuing source of great satisfaction.

Get Updates
Stay up to date with our RSS feed and Email Updates (subscribe in the sidebar). If you’re new to RSS, some general information about it can be found here. Also, you might want to read about it and check out Google Reader, which is an easy to use RSS reader.

Get updates by email

Get updates by RSS

Contact Me
I know how long it takes to word an email and appreciate the time you have spent doing so. I try my very best to reply to every single email that I receive. If I take a while, however, don’t worry, I will get back to you, it probably means I am just a little busy. Please use the following email address to contact me and try to include a descriptive re: line.


Contribute to a Post
Everyone has some wisdom to share, so if you’d like to see your name up in lights (or pixels at least), then get in touch!

{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }

Dr Michael Bates May 20, 2007 at 10:24 am

Great blog – Thanks for putting in the effort!

Andrew DeMaster June 13, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Very inciteful blog! I hope you’re able to keep it going over the longterm.

Len June 25, 2007 at 4:46 pm

Great blog. Looking forward to the book, it will be a fantastic reference.

AgentG July 15, 2007 at 1:28 am

There are an unbelievable number of patent attorneys, submitting patent applications today, who are not aware of the most basic tenets of patent prosecution. For example, I come across such damaging errors such as admitting prior art, drafting of claims that are not novel over admitted prior art, and even admission of on-sale bars to patentability of the claimed invention. Some patent attorneys appear to believe that you can cite prior art in a patent application to protect your claims from being cited over that very same prior art. I had one application where the drafter recited that all the various embodiments of the invention were obvious to one of skill in the art, repeatedly for various disclosed features and aspects described in the application.

In particular, I am astounded that clients are paying for experienced attorneys (usually with reg nos in the 20-39k range) who have absolutely no idea how to draft claims with even the most simple view on infringement potential. Furthermore, it still astounds me to see how many patent applications (the vast majority) refer to “objects of the invention” and use the term “the present invention”, although it is known among patent practitioners that such language can only be used to limit claim scope in litigation.

I see such poor quality patent work every day in my job as a PCT search professional, after having been trained as a prosecutor in several law firms. I cannot believe that the patent bar allows this extent of malfeasance and incompetence among its practitioners. Really.

Must remain anonymous…

Dr. Luminita Todor, Esq July 6, 2010 at 9:44 am

This blog excells by clarity and elegance of writing. Although not everybody would always agree with everything written in a blog entry, he(she) would find food for thought and a common sense perspective. Without pretending to be the final word in a topic, a blog entry is regularly a well thought and informative starting point. Keeping up with PatentablyDefined generously give the reading time worth to new practitioners as well as the seasoned ones. I remain grateful to the author(s).

Leave a Comment


Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.

Thesis customization by BrighteyeWeb LLC

PatentablyDefinedTM is a trademark of The Law Office of Michael E. Kondoudis