Author: PowerPatent Content Team
-
Amendment Playbooks: Narrow Smart, Preserve Scope
You’re building something big. You’ve put in late nights, solved tough problems, and finally turned your idea into real tech. Now you’re filing a patent to protect what you’ve built. But here’s the thing most founders don’t realize—getting a patent isn’t the finish line. It’s just the start. What Happens When You File a Patent—And…
-
Rule 130 Affidavits: Disqualify Your Own Disclosures Safely
You’re building something big. You’re moving fast. You’re showing your work to investors, pitching at demo days, launching your beta. Then it hits you—did that pitch count as a public disclosure? Did I just ruin my chances of getting a patent? What is a Rule 130 affidavit, really? More than a form—it’s a lifeline for…
-
Obviousness-Type Double Patenting: When to Use a Terminal Disclaimer
You’ve built something amazing. Maybe it’s a new hardware setup, a smarter algorithm, a unique user interface—something that’s not just cool, but actually new. You’re protecting it with a patent. Smart move. But here’s the twist most founders don’t see coming: just because your idea is new, doesn’t mean the patent office will say yes…
-
Declaration Power (1.132): Data That Defeats 103
If you’re building something new, smart, and maybe even a little bit wild, chances are someone at the patent office is going to tell you it’s “obvious.” They’ll throw Section 103 at you. It’s their way of saying, “This thing you invented? We think someone else could have figured it out too.” What’s a 103…
-
File History Judo: Use Estoppel and Statements Against 102/103
Getting a patent isn’t just about filing something smart. It’s about defending it later, too. And one of the smartest, simplest ways to defend your patent is by using what’s already in your file history. That’s what we call file history judo. First, What’s File History? The Hidden Map Behind Every Patent When you file…
-
103 Obviousness: Motivation to Combine—Build or Break It
You’ve built something new. Maybe it’s code. Maybe it’s hardware. Maybe it’s a new way of using existing tech. It’s working. It’s exciting. And now you’re thinking: should I patent this? Then someone throws out a scary phrase: “Section 103 obviousness.” What is “Motivation to Combine”? The Business Impact Behind the Legal Language For most…
-
Teaching Away & Unexpected Results: The 103 Evidence Pack
You’ve built something new. Maybe it’s a smarter way to process data, a clever algorithm, a unique machine learning model, or even just a better tool to solve a problem others gave up on. You know it works. You know it’s different. But how do you protect it? What is “Teaching Away” and Why Should…
-
Analogous Art in 103: Keep Out the Wrong References
If you’re building something new and want a patent, there’s one sneaky way your patent can get blocked before it even gets a chance: the examiner pulls in a reference from a totally different space. Something that sounds similar but has nothing to do with your invention. This is what we call analogous art in…
-
Ranges & Overlap: Winning 103 with Criticality
If you’re building something new and important, you need to protect it. That usually means patents. But there’s one big hurdle that trips up a lot of startups and inventors: the USPTO’s Section 103. It’s the rule that says your idea can’t just be new—it also has to be non-obvious. And that’s where things get…
-
112 Enablement: Wands Factors Checklist You Can Reuse
If you’re building something new—a product, a platform, a machine, or a breakthrough piece of tech—you probably care about speed. You want to move fast. Launch fast. Ship fast. And yes, protect fast. But when it comes to patents, there’s a part that can trip up even the smartest founders: Section 112 of U.S. patent…