Guidelines

Summary

- Standard patent claims are accepted
- Your patent claims can be slightly optimized for Cloem
- General Guidelines on How to write base claims are provided



Standard patent claims

Cloem has been designed to handle standard patent claims.

It means you can submit patent claims by copy and paste without any modification at all.

By "patent claim" we understand claims drafted by a patent attorney or agent. If you are an inventor, but not a patent attorney or patent agent, we strongly recommend that you do NOT draft your claims alone. Writing claims is a substantial intellectual effort and this requires skills and experience. Amateur claims are generally immediately recognizable. Poor claims will generally lead to poor variations. Well-structured claims will make a difference.

If you do not have patent claims ready to use:
- Cloem does not offer claim drafting services (and we won't)

- We recommend that you ask a patent attorney or patent agent to draft patent claims for you
- Alternatively you can pick-up closely related published patent claims of interest for you in public databases (if they are not copyrighted)

Optional optimization of your patent claims

If you have patent claims of your invention, they can be slightly optimized for our systems. It will focus our efforts and create better variations.

In such a case, try to optimize the structure and vocabulary of your claims from a formal standpoint. Regarding the substance, we have no idea if your claims are relevant or otherwise aligned with your business needs - or not. Only a patent attorney or agent can do this assessment. Alternatively, you - as an inventor and/or with the help of your patent attorney - can do it yourself, for example following the Guidelines below.

General guidelines

Recommended length of Claim 1 is 50 words
One independent Claim is accepted
Up to 25 dependent claims
Go straight to the point
Avoid implicit features or broadly available elements
Avoid patent jargon
Choose a simple terminology, naturally
Pay attention to antecedences
Think deep about lexical directions

In order to optimize variations, you can slightly amend your patent claims. As a general philosophy, compared to patent claims submitted before patent offices, you can go straight to the point, i.e. pay a little less attention to some of the standard patent laws' requirements (e.g. introduction of contextual or implicit features, requirements associated with the two-part form or with clarity, presence of formal expressions justified because of Case Law, etc)

Recommended length of Claim 1 is 50 words.

The recommended length for Claim 1 is in the range [30 words - 70 words]. A Claim 1 up to 500 words is accepted. Obviously, below 10 words, it doesn't make much sense. A 5-words claim is for example "a mouse with a screen". With such a sentence, you will get variations but we generally will lack sufficient information. A length of 150 words corresponds to the international standard length of the patent abstract. This length proves to lead to intesting results. A Claim length above 300 is not recommended and we do not accept Claims 1 above 500 words. The shorther your Claim 1, the broader the variations (in general). The longer your Claim 1, the narrower the variations (in general).

One independent Claim.

One independent claim is accepted (along its dependent claims). Your invention is either rather a method or rather a system. Even if "hybrid" to some extent (method steps are implemented somewhere), choose the most natural claim category (do not think in terms of scope of protection, only in terms of text input).
Incidentally, "compact" claims are not necessary ("a system comprising means adapted to perform the steps of the method according to any one of claims 1 to n")

Up to 25 dependent claims.

We do not accept claim trees comprising more than 25 claims. Due to fees structures (e.g. US 20, Europe 15), we believe this practice is the right one. If you think otherwise please let us know. We generally advise that your dependant claims are kept as short as possible. We generally use dependent claims for enriching the vocabulary injected into Claim 1. But if your dependent methods steps are "long", this is not a particular issue.

Go straight to the point.

Focus on the payload of the invention. In most cases, it means you can be elusive on the preamble but can pay attention to the characterizing part. Handle with care the delicate passages, where you think the "payload" is located (the better the grammar, the better the results).

Avoid implicit features or broadly available elements.

For example, in "a computer with communication capabilities", the mention of  "with communication capabilities" is generally superfluous even if you further need such capabilities later on. When setting the scene, it is not always required to introduce a "database" or "an access to a network".

What you should know is that every single word you mention in the patent claims is likely to be varied (independently or not from other words). If you think a given word is justified because of the very substance of the invention, leave it in place. Otherwise, if the word or expression presence is predominantly present for formal reasons (e.g. "internal" patent laws requirements), consider to suppress it.

Avoid patent jargon.

For example, avoid expressions like "program instructions which when executed on a suitable computer device cause the processor to perform the steps of". Just delete such parts and write "a method".

Choose a simple terminology, naturally.

For example you can write "a button" instead of "actuation means". With our dictionaries, both versions will be created. But if you are using a extremely rare word, we will have a tendency to not vary it too much. If you are using a common word, we will vary it normally.

Pay attention to antecedences.

Detected antecedences will generally be co-varied (e.g. varied at the same time with the same replacement words). In your claims, pay attention to the use of words like "said", "a", "the" and/or to anaphors (e.g. "processing unit" and later use of a shortcut like "unit"). A majority of texts will follow the antecedences as they are declared by you (but please note that sometimes we also "break down" antecedences, join or merge words or expressions with intention).

Think deep about lexical directions.

As an expert of your field, you know and feel how to cross-fertilize some specific technical domains. Choose with care the keywords when configuring your plan, write or select with care your dependent claims (this provides vocabulary and some grammar) and select with care the indications of patent classification classes (providing us with possible bridges and access to specific silos of words). For example, if your patent claims are directed towards mechanical springs and if you provide us with a word like "molecular", we may create inventions around "molecular springs".

Happy inventions !