• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patents
      • Patent Consultation
      • Patent Search Service
      • Patent Application Service
      • Patent Prosecution
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademarks
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application Services
      • Trademark Prosecution
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
        • How to respond to an office action?
        • Request for non-publication of a patent application
        • Anatomy of a Patent Document
        • How to write a broad patent application?
        • Design patents: pros and cons
      • Patent costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • Worldwide patents
        • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
        • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
      • Responding to Office Actions
        • Overview of Office Actions
      • Trademarks
        • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
        • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
        • How to select a trademark?
          • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent Applications / Avoid disparaging prior art in patent application

Avoid disparaging prior art in patent application

March 28, 2016 by James Yang

Updated: January 20, 2022

Patent ApplicationDisparaging the prior art in the patent application may narrow patent claims

When a patent application disparages a prior art technique, feature, aspect, or apparatus, the court may assume that there is a disclaimer of the disparaged subject matter and may then narrow the scope of the claims to exclude the disparaged subject matter if and when the patent application matures into a patent.  In Ultimate Pointer LLC v. Nintendo Co. Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 3/1/16), the court construed the claim phrase “handheld device” (i.e., handheld pointing device), which on its face would appear to include both direct and indirect handheld pointing to device, to exclude indirect pointing devices because the patent application was drafted to repeatedly disparage indirect pointing devices.

Other ways of introducing disparaging comments about prior art

Instead of disparaging the prior art in the patent application, the patent application should be drafted to focus on the benefits of the present invention.  There is little or no need to highlight the deficiencies of the prior art through the patent application.  The disparaging information can be presented to the patent examiner through other means after filing the patent application.  Also, these other ways may have a less potential impact on claim scope.  For example, the disparaging information could be contained in a response to an office action, submitted in an information disclosure statement, and/or presented to the examiner during an examiner’s interview.  These means of presenting information to the examiner allow the inventor to present the information through attorney argument and without a declaration by the inventor.

In contrast, when a patent application is filed, it is submitted with a declaration wherein the inventor states under penalty of perjury that:

I hereby state that I have reviewed and understood the contents of the above identified application, including the claims, as amended by any amendment specifically referred to above.

As such, statements and comments made in the patent application are given more weight than statements made by an attorney.

Ultimate Pointer case

Ultimate Pointer illustrates the disadvantages of disparaging the prior art in a patent application.    In Ultimate Pointer, the patent application disparaged the prior art and it was this patent application that matured into the patent at issue.  The patent owner (Ultimate Pointer) patented a handheld pointing device to control a cursor during a presentation.

Definition of direct pointing device

The patent distinguished direct pointing devices and indirect pointing devices.  The patent specification defined direct pointing devices as devices wherein the physical point of aim coincides with the item being pointed such as laser pointers. Direct pointing devices also interacted with the screen itself.  The patent touted the benefits of direct pointing devices.

Definition of indirect pointing device defined

Indirect pointing devices are those devices wherein the physical point of aim does not coincide with the item being pointed such as a computer mouse.  Indirect pointing devices do not interact with the screen.  The patent specification disparaged indirect pointing devices.

Wii gaming console

Nintendo sells Wii gaming consoles with a handheld pointing device.  I own a Wii gaming console.  Some of the games use the handheld device in a manner where the device does not point toward the screen.  For example, the tennis game requires the user to point the Wii handheld device away from the screen.  Other games and the setup require the user to point the Wii handheld device toward the screen and point to various items.  But it turns out that while the handheld device is pointed toward the screen, the Wii handheld device does not directly interact with the screen and instead interacts with a sensor positioned in front of the screen.

Ct. found that handheld devices for pointing exclude indirect pointing devices

To broaden the scope of patent claims to include the Wii handheld device, Ultimate Pointer had argued that the plain meaning of “handheld device” encompassed the Wii pointer but the court disagreed.  Due to the extensive disparaging comments at every turn in the specification which disparaged indirect handheld pointing devices, the court found that “handheld device” did not include indirect pointing devices like the Wii pointer.  The patented pointing device required a direct pointing device involving direct interaction between the screen and the handheld device and excluded the disparaged indirect pointing devices.

Wii gaming console uses an indirect pointing device

The Wii gaming console does not work based on direct interaction between the TV screen and the Wii handheld pointing device.  Rather, the Wii handheld device interacts with a sensor bar (not a TV screen) positioned in front of the TV screen.  Thus, the Wii handheld device is not a direct pointing device because the cursor on the TV screen is based on an indirect relationship between the Wii handheld device and the screen via the sensor bar even though it may create the illusion of direct pointing.

Patent specification repeatedly disparaged indirect pointing devices

The disparaging comments regarding indirect pointing devices permeated the patent specification.  The patent’s title of the patent referred to the direct pointing aspect.  The specification repeatedly stated that the disclosed system is for interacting with a presentation in a direct pointing manner.   It also emphasized that direct pointing was superior to indirect pointing.  It characterized indirect pointing as less than natural.  The specification included one embodiment directed to an indirect pointer but indicated that indirect pointing is only used when direct pointing is not possible or not desired.

Ways to include disparaging comments while mitigating the adverse impact to claim scope

Instead of disparaging the prior art in the specification, inventors may present the same information to the examiner without such a severe impact by presenting the same information in a response to an office action, in an information disclosure statement, or even during a telephonic interview with the examiner.  These other means of introducing information may have a less adverse impact on the scope of the claims.  Interviews are often merely summarized so that information presented during the interview is often not even mentioned in the prosecution history, and if mentioned, are summarized so the patentee’s complete comments seldom appear in the patent’s prosecution history.  Further, comments in Amendments responding to an Office Action are seldom made with a declaration and may often be characterized as attorney argument.  Thus, it is useful for patent drafters to recognize that disparaging the prior art may limit the patent claims and proceed accordingly.

I invite you to contact me with your patent questions at (949) 433-0900. Please feel free to forward this article to your friends. As an Orange County Patent Attorney, I serve Orange County, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego, and surrounding cities.

Related Articles for Patent Applications

  • How to respond to an office action?
  • Request for non-publication of a patent application
  • Anatomy of a patent document
  • How to write a broad patent application?
  • Design patents: pros and cons
  • How not to write the background section of a patent application?
  • Avoid disparaging prior art in patent application
  • Broad claims pose enablement issues
  • Claim Drafting Tip: Avoid means plus function claims
  • Functional language invalidates patent claim
  • Transitional phrase in a claim determines scope of patent protection
  • Patent Drafting Tip: Alternative embodiments create prior art
  • Preparing Drawings for a Utility Patent Application
  • Expedited examination at the USPTO
  • Define the invention
  • Claim scope negatively impacted due to deleted info from provisional application
  • Limits on trade dress protection when also securing a utility patent
  • Means plus function without the MEANS trigger
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Author

James Yang is a patent attorney. For more than 16 years, James Yang has been representing clients to secure patent protection for their inventions and register trademarks to protect their brands. If you need help, call him at (949) 433-0900. Read More…

Popular Posts

  • Patent process overview
  • Patent process explained
  • How much does a patent cost?
  • Why patent your invention in a bad economy?

Patent Book

Navigating the Patent System - new book by Orange County patent attorney, James Yang

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the patent process and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

RECEIVE PATENT ARTICLES

Stay up to date on major changes and get tips on the patent process.

We respect your privacy.

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Patent Consultations
Patent Searches
Patent Applications
Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Overview
Trademark Search Services
Trademark Application Services
Trademark Prosecution Services
Trademark Enforcement Services
Trademark Defense Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete Terms of Use
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney