IP IntelligenceIP Lex ›Book a service

IP Intelligence

Patent Criticalities

The things that quietly decide whether an invention can be protected - explained before they cost you anything.

Showing 10 of 56.

Critical

Claim 1 describes your product instead of your invention

Claim 1 is the patent. If it recites the specific product you happened to build - your materials, your dimensions, your architecture - then a competitor only has to …

During draftingIntermediate
High

Software claimed as software

You cannot patent a computer programme per se. You can, on current Indian authority, patent an invention that happens to be implemented in software if it delivers a …

During draftingAdvanced
High

Adding words does not make a claim stronger

It feels safer to describe the invention thoroughly in the claim. It is the opposite of safer. Every additional word is an additional condition that a competitor has…

During draftingIntermediate
High

There is nowhere to retreat to

Claim 1 will often not survive examination. What decides whether you still have a patent worth having is whether the drafter built a ladder of narrower, meaningful p…

During draftingIntermediate
High

You only described the one you built

A specification that describes exactly one implementation gives you exactly one implementation to fall back on. Alternatives you considered and rejected are some of …

During draftingIntermediate
Medium

Nobody can tell exactly what the claim covers

A claim has to define a boundary that other people can find. Words like substantially, approximately, optimal, efficient and high-strength push that boundary into fo…

During draftingIntermediate
Medium

The same thing has three different names

It matters more than it seems. If the description calls something a housing, a casing and an enclosure, an examiner has to decide whether those are one thing or thre…

During draftingBeginner
Medium

The specification never says what problem this solves

Inventive step is argued as a story: this was the problem, this is what the field taught, this is why our solution was not obvious. If the specification never states…

During draftingIntermediate
Medium

Why the drawings can decide the case

Drawings are read as part of the disclosure. A well-made set can support a claim term that the text handles clumsily; a careless set can contradict the text and crea…

During draftingBeginner
High

The invention changed after you filed

A patent application protects what it described on the day it was filed. Engineering does not stop on that day - and the version you eventually sell is often meaning…

During draftingIntermediate

LowWorth knowing
MediumCould create complications
HighCan materially affect protection
CriticalAct before proceeding

This is the Ragulika IP Educational Criticality - our own editorial prioritisation device, to help you decide what to read first. It is not a legal score, it is not calculated from your facts, and it says nothing about the strength of any particular application.

Keep going.

Every explanation here links to the ones next to it. Follow the thread rather than the menu.

Educational guidance, not legal advice. This material is published by Ragulika IP for general education and information. It is not legal advice, it does not create a professional-client relationship, and it is not a substitute for advice on your own facts. Patentability, infringement, prosecution strategy and every other IP outcome turn on the specific facts and on the law and Patent Office practice as they stand at the time you act. Please take professional advice before making a decision, and read the underlying provision or judgment before relying on any point stated here.