- Home
- Our vision
- Our values
- Members
- Access
- Blog
- Contact
- Language
What should and what should not be written in the specification and the claims. What to target and what to write. The options available at the patent prosecution stage will vary completely based on whether the specification was written with purpose or without purpose. Our OJT begins with the acquisition of the skills needed to increase options for the patent prosecution stage, and we spend a great deal of time debating this issue. As a result, we are confident that the Knowledge we have accumulated allows us to provide more options to our customers.
We meet with customers to discuss and clarify the technical ideas of their inventions, and then continue these discussions by presenting multiple aspects of subject matters that express the technical ideas and can be used for claims reciting. We then explore optimal patent prosecution strategies by considering the advantages and disadvantages of these aspects.
Our customers are able to select the best patent strategies because they are able to select descriptions to be written in specifications and subject matters of claims from the large number of options we provide.
Where does the customer’s business lie in the product distribution process? From what aspects thereof would they like to eliminate the intervention of third parties? We work to understand the businesses of our customers so we can create claims that are optimized for their specific circumstances as necessary. Even if claims optimized for specific circumstances can be covered using highly conceptualized claims, we still consider the creation of claims that are optimized for the customer’s business and then write descriptions in specifications that align with that business. Expressing technical ideas using concepts that are as broad as possible is simply a minimum requirement for a patent attorney, and so, once we have satisfied this minimum requirement we believe it is critical to obtain additional patents that are in line with business requirements.
We believe that other things besides the scope of rights, such as, for example, registration rates, etc. are also controllable. As long as there are many options for the matters described in specifications and claims, our customers will be able to select from a wide variety of strategies, such as strategies that emphasize the volume of rights to be acquired, and strategies that emphasize the scope of rights, etc.
This is technically complex. Let’s entrust it to that member of the Knowledge Partners. He can handle complex technology. I’m sure he’ll be able to handle this.
People except the inventors find the invention difficult to understand. Members of Knowledge Partners are often nominated to help in such cases.
This is a good invention. This could become an essential technology for our company in future. We better entrust this to that member of the Knowledge Partners. I’m sure he’ll be able to handle this.
In many cases, our customers turn to Knowledge Partners when they develop technologies that have the potential to become essential patents.
This invention has a rich array of variations and would likely tie in with a large number of patent applications. That’s why we should entrust it to that member of the Knowledge Partners. I’m sure he’ll be able to handle this.
When a large number of patent applications are predicted, we often receive inquiries about the availability of Knowledge Partners members.
The only person I know who won’t give up in circumstances where others would and who always approaches his job with an eye toward making contributions to obtaining patents is that guy at Knowledge Partners. If he can talk with the inventor, he may be able to discover points of patentability even when, at first glance, it seems to be difficult to obtain patent. I’m sure he’ll be able to handle this.
Members of the Knowledge Partners hear this sort of praise from customers all the time.